New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said Saturday that he personally contacted President Donald Trump to express his opposition to the U.S. military’s capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, marking one of the first major national policy statements of Mamdani’s mayoralty just days after taking office. According to Mamdani, the phone call occurred after he was formally briefed on the overnight operation that resulted in Maduro and his wife being transported to the United States and placed into federal custody in New York, where prosecutors intend to pursue long-standing narco-terrorism charges. Mamdani characterized the conversation as direct but limited, explaining that his purpose was not to debate operational details but to clearly register his objections on legal, moral, and policy grounds. “I called the president and spoke with him directly to register my opposition to this act,” Mamdani said, emphasizing that his concern centered on what he described as the pursuit of regime change, the violation of international law, and the need for consistent standards in U.S. foreign policy. While Mamdani did not disclose the president’s response, he made clear that he believed it was important for the mayor of the nation’s largest city to communicate his position directly, particularly given New York’s global status and its large Venezuelan immigrant population. The call underscored the unusually prominent role Mamdani has chosen to take on international issues early in his tenure, positioning himself as a vocal critic of military intervention even when framed by the federal government as a law enforcement action.

Mamdani’s comments came during an unrelated press conference in the Greenpoint neighborhood of Brooklyn, where he was asked by reporters to respond to news of the U.S. operation in Venezuela. Speaking on his third day in office, Mamdani reiterated that his objections were rooted in principle rather than partisanship, although his remarks quickly became a focal point in a broader political debate. “I registered my opposition. I made it clear and we left it at that,” he said, declining to elaborate on the tone or substance of President Trump’s reaction. CBS News reported that Mamdani appeared intent on drawing a clear boundary between his responsibilities as mayor and the federal government’s authority over foreign policy, while still asserting his right to speak out when he believed international actions could have local consequences. Mamdani argued that unilateral military action against a sovereign nation, regardless of its stated purpose, raises serious concerns under both U.S. and international law. He also suggested that such actions risk setting dangerous precedents that could be applied inconsistently depending on political circumstances. By framing his opposition in legal and ethical terms, Mamdani sought to avoid appearing dismissive of concerns about narcotics trafficking or organized crime, instead focusing on the methods used to address those issues. His remarks reflected a broader skepticism among progressive leaders toward military involvement abroad, particularly when it intersects with questions of regime change and sovereignty.

Earlier in the day, Mamdani released a detailed written statement on the X platform that further outlined his position and the reasoning behind it. In the statement, he confirmed that he had been briefed on the capture of both Nicolás Maduro and his wife, as well as their planned detention in federal custody in New York City. Mamdani described the operation as a unilateral attack on a sovereign nation and argued that it constituted an act of war, asserting that such actions violate both federal and international law. He warned that what he called a “blatant pursuit of regime change” carries consequences beyond the immediate targets of the operation, directly affecting New Yorkers with personal, familial, or economic ties to Venezuela. Mamdani highlighted that tens of thousands of Venezuelans live in New York City, many of whom fled political instability and economic hardship, and he said his administration’s primary concern was their safety and well-being. According to the statement, city officials would continue to monitor developments closely and issue guidance as necessary to address any local impacts, including potential protests, diplomatic repercussions, or community tensions. By emphasizing the local dimension of an international crisis, Mamdani framed his involvement as an extension of his responsibility to protect New Yorkers rather than an attempt to dictate national policy. The statement quickly circulated online, drawing praise from critics of U.S. interventionism and sharp criticism from those who viewed the operation as a legitimate effort to enforce U.S. law.

Democrats critical of the operation have attempted to characterize it as an attack on Venezuela and evidence that the United States is now at war with the South American nation, a framing that the Trump administration and its allies strongly dispute. Administration officials have repeatedly stressed that the operation was primarily a law enforcement action carried out with military support, aimed at apprehending a fugitive already indicted in U.S. courts. President Trump reinforced this narrative in an early morning announcement on social media, stating that American federal law enforcement agents, working in conjunction with the U.S. military, successfully captured Maduro in a carefully planned overnight operation. In his post, Trump described the action as decisive and promised additional details, framing the mission as a necessary response to what he described as Maduro’s long-standing criminal activities. Supporters of the operation argue that the use of military assets does not automatically transform an action into an act of war, particularly when the objective is the arrest of individuals facing serious criminal charges. They contend that critics are deliberately blurring legal distinctions to score political points, while ignoring the scope of the allegations against Maduro. This clash in framing has become central to the political debate, with one side emphasizing sovereignty and international law, and the other highlighting accountability, justice, and the extraordinary nature of the alleged crimes.

Attorney General Pam Bondi expanded on the president’s announcement with a statement of her own, detailing the charges Maduro and his wife face in the Southern District of New York. According to Bondi, Maduro has been indicted on charges including narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, and weapons-related offenses involving machine guns and destructive devices. Bondi’s statement framed the capture as the culmination of years of investigation and legal preparation, portraying it as a victory for the rule of law rather than a geopolitical maneuver. She praised President Trump for what she described as the courage to demand accountability and thanked the U.S. military for conducting what she called an “incredible and highly successful mission.” Reports from The Associated Press indicated that residents of Caracas heard multiple explosions and observed low-flying aircraft in the early morning hours, while U.S. officials later confirmed that helicopters from the Army’s 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment, known as the “Night Stalkers,” were involved in the operation. While these reports added to the dramatic nature of the event, administration officials maintained that the mission was tightly controlled and designed to minimize broader conflict. Bondi emphasized that Maduro and his wife would now face the American justice system, underscoring that the courtroom, not the battlefield, was the ultimate venue for accountability.

The sharp divide between Mamdani’s response and the Trump administration’s framing highlights a broader national debate over the limits of U.S. power, the role of the military in law enforcement actions, and the meaning of international law in an era of transnational crime. For Mamdani, the capture of Maduro represents a dangerous precedent that risks entangling the United States in conflicts under the guise of criminal justice, while also destabilizing communities at home. For the administration and its supporters, the operation stands as proof that no individual, regardless of position or power, is beyond the reach of U.S. law. As Maduro’s case moves forward in federal court, these competing narratives are likely to intensify, shaping public opinion and political discourse in the weeks and months ahead. Mamdani’s early decision to confront the president directly signals that he intends to use his platform as mayor to weigh in on national and international issues, even when doing so invites controversy. Whether that approach strengthens his standing with New Yorkers or exposes him to criticism for overstepping traditional mayoral boundaries remains to be seen. What is clear is that the capture of Nicolás Maduro has already reverberated far beyond Venezuela, sparking legal, political, and moral debates that reach from Washington to New York City and into the global arena.