Andrew Cuomo’s latest mayoral campaign gambit is a masterclass in political shade-throwing. The former New York governor, now running as an independent for New York City mayor, has proposed “Zohran’s law” to block high-income earners from snagging rent-stabilized apartments, as Fox News reports. It’s a direct jab at his rival, Democratic Party nominee Zohran Mamdani, who lives in one such unit in Astoria, Queens.
Cuomo, who resigned as governor in disgrace in 2021 amid a flurry of controversies, is using this proposal to paint Mamdani as a privileged hypocrite. The independent candidate’s social media video, which racked up over 33 million views on X, slams Mamdani for paying just $2,300 for a one-bedroom rent-stabilized apartment. This, Cuomo argues, is an abuse of a system meant for struggling New Yorkers.
“Rent-stabilized apartments when they’re vacant should only be rented to people who need affordable housing, not people like Zohran Mamdani,” Cuomo declared. His proposal would cap the income of new tenants in vacant rent-stabilized units, ensuring the annual rent is at least 30% of their income. For a $2,500-a-month apartment, that means a tenant’s income couldn’t exceed $100,000.
Cuomo’s campaign took a sharp turn after his surprising loss to Mamdani in the June 2025 Democratic Party primary. Undeterred, he has doubled down as an independent, flooding social media with attack videos. The “Zohran’s law” pitch is his latest attempt to undermine Mamdani’s affordability credentials.
Mamdani, a vocal progressive, has made rent freezes a cornerstone of his campaign. His website boldly claims he’ll “immediately freeze the rent for all stabilized tenants” as mayor. Yet, landlords and housing advocates argue such a move would be illegal, exposing the naivety of his platform.
Cuomo’s video doesn’t hold back, accusing Mamdani of gaming the system. “No matter which way you cut it: Zohran Mamdani is a rich person,” Cuomo said. He paints a vivid picture of a “historic affordability crisis” where low-income families are left in the cold while Mamdani enjoys a cushy deal.
Mamdani isn’t taking the bait quietly. “What do we know about this policy proposal beyond the fact that it seeks to evict me from my apartment?” he quipped, dismissing Cuomo’s plan as petty revenge. The Democratic nominee suggests the former governor is still stinging from his primary defeat.
“Like so much of Andrew Cuomo’s politics, it is characterized by a petty vindictiveness,” Mamdani added. He questions how many New Yorkers would face eviction or upheaval under this vaguely defined law. It’s a fair point -- Cuomo’s proposal lacks clarity on its broader impact.
Cuomo’s rhetoric leans hard into the plight of struggling families. “Somewhere last night in New York City, a single mother and her children slept at a homeless shelter,” he said. It’s a poignant image, but one that feels manipulative when paired with his personal attack on Mamdani.
The “Zohran’s law” idea only applies to vacant rent-stabilized apartments, a detail that limits its scope but fuels its targeted sting. By tying the policy to Mamdani’s name, Cuomo ensures the jab lands squarely on his opponent’s doorstep. It’s clever, if not a bit spiteful.
Mamdani’s counterattack accuses Mayor Eric Adams of stacking the Rent Guidelines Board with rent-hike enthusiasts. He claims he’d appoint board members who’d keep rents frozen, a move that sounds noble but dodges legal realities. Landlords argue such freezes would violate existing regulations.
Former Mayor Bill de Blasio, notably silent on endorsements, chimed in with a jab at Cuomo. “I did a rent freeze and almost 2 million hard-working New Yorkers benefited,” he posted. His refusal to back Mamdani, though, suggests even he’s wary of the nominee’s lofty promises.
Cuomo’s campaign thrives on these public spats, with “Zohran’s law” as the latest salvo in a growing feud. “You don’t need to be renting rent-stabilized units to wealthy people,” Cuomo insisted, framing Mamdani as an elitist out of touch with New York’s working class. It’s a narrative that resonates with voters fed up with progressive posturing.
Mamdani’s retort, “I live rent-free in his head,” is a witty deflection but sidesteps the core issue. If he’s championing affordability, why is he, a well-off candidate, occupying a subsidized unit? It’s a question that cuts through his campaign’s moral high ground.
This clash exposes the deeper flaws in New York’s housing system, where good intentions often collide with practical limits. Cuomo’s proposal, while pointed, highlights a real issue: rent-stabilized units should prioritize those in need, not political opportunists. Mamdani’s refusal to engage beyond snark only fuels skepticism about his agenda.
