The Trump administration threw cold water on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s dream of arresting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, calling the proposal “pure political theater.” U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz responded on Saturday after Mamdani revealed he was in “active conversation” with New York City’s Law Department over whether he could order Netanyahu’s arrest if the Israeli leader visits New York for the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in September.  “Mayor Mamdani: here’s why your threat to arrest PM Netanyahu in NYC during UNGA is not going to happen,” Waltz wrote on X. He went on to elaborate that the United States is not a party to the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court (ICC), the U.N. Headquarters Agreement grants diplomatic protections to visiting heads of government, longstanding head-of-state immunity applies, and “federal authority trumps any local mayor’s wishes.” “This is pure political theater,” Waltz concluded. Mayor Mamdani: here’s why your threat to arrest PM Netanyahu’s in NYC during UNGA is not going to happen: 1. The U.S. is not party to the Rome Statute that underlies the ICC, 2. The UN Headquarters Agreement grants diplomatic protections to visiting heads of gov’t, 3.… — Ambassador Mike Waltz (@michaelgwaltz) July 18, 2026 Mamdani has repeatedly argued that Netanyahu should be arrested over an International Criminal Court warrant accusing the Israeli prime minister of war crimes and crimes against humanity related to Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. “I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu belongs in The Hague,” Mamdani said during an interview with The New York Times. “He’s a war criminal who has been charged by the International Criminal Court.” While acknowledging uncertainty over his legal authority, Mamdani said his administration is actively reviewing whether New York City could detain Netanyahu if he arrives for the annual U.N. General Assembly. “Whatever the law allows me to do in New York City, that’s what we will do, but we won’t be writing our own laws to that end,” he said. The comments marked a continuation of promises Mamdani made during last year’s mayoral campaign, when he pledged to direct the New York Police Department to arrest Netanyahu if he entered the city in compliance with the ICC warrant. At the time, Mamdani said, “It is my desire to ensure that this be a city that stands up for international law.” Legal experts have long questioned whether such an arrest would be possible, noting that the United States does not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction and that any attempt by a city government to detain a sitting foreign head of government would almost certainly trigger a confrontation with federal authorities. Netanyahu has dismissed Mamdani’s most recent threats, telling radio host Sid Rosenberg that he was unconcerned by the mayor’s rhetoric while accusing Mamdani of sympathizing with Hamas. “I think he should look at who he’s condemning, who he’s praising,” Netanyahu said. “He’s condemning Israel, the one democracy that stands shoulder to shoulder with American values.” Netanyahu, appearing on Sid Rosenberg’s radio show, claims Mamdani “champions” Hamas and “apologizes and accuses for Iran, “He is with the terror actors… I think, secretly, he hates America.” pic.twitter.com/x2ILVvhAFX — Jacob N. Kornbluh (@jacobkornbluh) July 15, 2026 Waltz’s statement is the clearest indication yet that the Trump administration has no intention of allowing any effort by New York City officials to act on Mamdani’s proposal, effectively ending speculation over whether the mayor could attempt to use the ICC warrant during Netanyahu’s expected September visit.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has made permanent a controversial program that pays people cash for turning in used syringes, cementing an initiative that critics argue risks creating a cycle in which active drug users receive money that can be used to purchase more drugs. Mamdani’s first city budget includes $3 million to permanently fund the Community Syringe Redemption Program, first reported by the New York Post, which pays participants 20 cents for every used syringe they return, up to 50 syringes — or $10 — per day. The funding appeared in budget documents submitted to the City Council shortly before lawmakers approved the city’s roughly $126 billion spending plan. Originally authorized as a pilot program through legislation backed by progressive members of the City Council in 2022, the initiative officially launched in March 2025. Under the program, participants can bring used syringes to one of eight collection sites across the city in exchange for cash. The effort is administered by the nonprofit Addiction Response Resources under an $11.1 million contract that extends through the end of next year. City officials say the program is financed through more than $189 million New York received in opioid settlement funds from pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors. Supporters argue the program has successfully reduced hazardous syringe litter across the city. According to the city’s Health Department, more than 2.3 million syringes have been collected since the program began. During its first year, the city distributed roughly $292,000 to more than 1,700 participants. Sanitation Department data also suggests fewer discarded needles are ending up on city streets. Workers had collected 26,229 needles so far this year, compared to 64,560 during the same period the previous year. Health Department spokeswoman Rachel Vick defended the initiative, saying the program helps residents “live in a community free of syringe litter” while ensuring used medical waste is safely disposed of. “The city’s syringe redemption program allows New Yorkers in neighborhoods where we see the most complaints to help keep their communities clean, while safely disposing of medical waste and connecting people in need to nearby care,” Vick said. But critics say the city is addressing one public health problem by incentivizing another. Queens Councilwoman Joann Ariola, a Republican, argued that opioid settlement money should be directed toward addiction treatment rather than cash payments to active drug users. “All this is doing is putting money in the pockets of addicts, so they can continue to fuel their habits, rather than helping them break free of their disease,” Ariola said. Bronx Councilman Oswald Feliz, a Democrat whose district includes two of the redemption sites, credited the effort for reducing discarded needles but warned against policies that could create new risks for surrounding neighborhoods. “Too often, used syringes end up in front of schools and children’s parks, and this is an issue that should be treated with the seriousness it deserves,” Feliz said. “We should not recklessly create conditions that can threaten the safety of vulnerable communities.” Some participants openly acknowledged using the program to provide spending money. “It’s definitely a side hustle for me. Yeah, definitely!” participant Tamia Wright told the Post after redeeming used syringes at a Bronx collection site. Asked how she planned to spend the money, Wright replied: “Right now, I’m gonna buy some weed with [the earnings] and cigarettes.” That admission has become a focal point for opponents of the program, who argue it demonstrates the inherent flaw in paying cash for used needles. While the initiative may reduce dangerous litter, they contend it also places money directly into the hands of active drug users without requiring participation in addiction treatment or recovery services. Despite those concerns, city officials have no plans to eliminate the program. While the Health Department says it is not currently considering expanding beyond its eight existing collection sites or increasing the daily payment cap, the inclusion of permanent funding in Mamdani’s first budget effectively makes the syringe buyback program a lasting part of New York City’s public health strategy.

British prosecutors have issued 38 new criminal charges against Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan after the pair were arrested in Miami on Saturday by federal officials on rape charges and an outstanding warrant in the United Kingdom. The additional charges pave the way for possible extradition proceedings across the pond as the pair now face a total of 59 charges, according to Hertfordshire Police. Following the arrest of Andrew and Tristan Tate overnight in the US, our Assistant Chief Constable Karena Thomas has issued a statement. The brothers were arrested as part of an ongoing investigation by our major crime unit into a number of sexual offences. pic.twitter.com/wwsaXO3Muz — Bedfordshire Police (@bedspolice) July 19, 2026 The Crown Prosecution Service last year charged Andrew Tate with 10 counts of crimes, including rape and human trafficking related to three women, The Daily Wire previously reported. His younger brother, Tristan, was charged with 11 counts of similar crimes tied to one woman. On Saturday, the Crown Prosecution Service announced additional counts for each brother, including 19 charges related to illegal child images and pornography for Andrew Tate. “We can confirm the arrest of the Tate brothers today in Miami,” the U.S. Marshals Service said in a statement. “The warrant was sealed so we are unable to confirm the charges.” The office of Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier — who last year opened an investigation into the Tate brothers — confirmed to The Daily Wire that the pair were taken into custody on an arrest warrant from the United Kingdom. Florida AG’s office tells @realDailyWire the Tate brothers were taken into custody on a UK arrest warrant. https://t.co/6wDfk5xadK — Brent Scher (@BrentScher) July 19, 2026 The Tate brothers continue to deny all wrongdoing and accuse British authorities of unfairly targeting them. Joseph McBride, a lawyer for the pair, said in a statement that “the world knows Andrew and Tristan are innocent” and described the additional charges as a “political hit,” per the BBC. “Their enemies know it best of all. That is exactly why they have been attacked,” McBride said. The pair have remained under criminal investigation in Romania for human trafficking since 2022, according to Reuters.

Andrew and Tristan Tate — the controversial brothers and “manosphere” influencers — were arrested in Miami on Saturday on a warrant in the United Kingdom. The Tates are charged with a slew of crimes ranging from sexual assault and rape to human trafficking and possession of child pornography. The Tates were first arrested on similar charges in Romania in 2022, the beginning of an ongoing criminal saga for the pair, who rose to prominence with their flashy lifestyles and videos encouraging young men to be “alpha males.” But who are Andrew and Tristan, exactly? How did they rise to prominence? And when did things start to go south? Here’s everything you need to know about the Tate brothers. A transatlantic beginning. Andrew, 39, and Tristan, 38, were born to a British mother, Eileen, and an American Air Force sergeant and chess master, Emory Tate. They lived in the United States until their parents divorced, whereupon they returned to the United Kingdom with their mother. The pair also have a younger sister, Janine, about whom little is publicly available. Both Tate brothers hold dual citizenship in the United States and the United Kingdom. Andrew Tate began kickboxing around 2005 and went on to win four world championships. Tristan also enjoyed mild success in kickboxing, but the pair soon moved on to more nefarious pursuits. Big Brother is watching. According to Andrew Tate, in 2014 he began brainstorming ways to make money, which was not coming in from kickboxing. Realizing that he “had about five girlfriends,” he decided to begin a webcam pornography business, beginning with just his “girlfriends” and eventually recruiting other women to “perform.” Tate claims that the business netted $100,000 in its first month. The brothers moved their webcam empire to Romania sometime between 2015 and 2017, where it took on a massive scale. BEN SHAPIRO: ANDREW TATE’S FILTHY GRIFT In that window, Andrew Tate rose to fame as a contestant on the British version of the popular reality TV show, Big Brother. Tate was booted from the show after just six days, with producers citing Tate’s “outside activities” as grounds for removal. Those “outside activities” include some of the earliest allegations against the Tate brothers. Several women have accused the brothers of luring them to Romania on the promise of a romantic relationship, only to coerce them into performing for their webcam streams. At least two women have accused the Tate brothers of raping and physically assaulting them during this period, when Andrew Tate claims to have made more than half a million dollars a month and had 75 women working for him. But by 2020, the webcam ring was shuttered. The Tates had a new venture, and it would be their biggest yet. Into the Manosphere. Around 2017, the Tates began pitching themselves as lifestyle gurus, teaching young men how to succeed in business and romance. By 2020, that business had grown into Hustler’s University, an online community where, for $50 a month, men could learn from the Tate brothers. Or, for $8,000 a year, members could join the “War Room” for even more elite lessons. Fueled by their social media posts depicting flashy cars, women, and all-around lavish living, the Tates developed a massive following, primarily among young men. The men who flocked to Tate’s courses learned that the way to make money and impress women was to behave like the Tates — that is, arrogant, flashy, and rude to the women they wanted to attract. UPSTREAM: The Real Reason Young Men Are Flocking To The Manosphere During this time, Tate became a player in the culture wars thanks to his controversial statements about women, minorities, and especially Jews. Following Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, Tate began to express support for Palestinian terrorists, denied the Holocaust, and performed a Nazi salute, among other antisemitic acts. Tate claimed that at its peak, Hustler’s University had 80,000 members, though that number has not been independently verified. In 2022, Tate closed Hustler’s University amid allegations that the program was really a pyramid scheme. It was the beginning of an avalanche of legal troubles that continue to this day. On the run. In 2022, Andrew and Tristan Tate were arrested in Romania and charged with human trafficking. They were placed under house arrest in early 2023 and remained under house arrest on and off until February 2025, when Romanian authorities lifted travel restrictions on the brothers. But the Tate brothers still faced charges in Romania, as well as in the United Kingdom, which charged the brothers with similar crimes last May. Last year, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier opened an investigation into the brothers, who frequently spend time in Miami. Despite outstanding warrants or investigations in the three countries they called home, the Tates seemed to enjoy freedom of movement until Saturday, when federal authorities arrested them at a Miami airport on a warrant issued by the Crown Prosecution Service of the United Kingdom. What are the Tates charged with? British prosecutors issued 38 new criminal charges against Andrew and Tristan Tate following their arrest. The pair now face a total of 59 charges, according to Hertfordshire Police, a total that could lead to their extradition to the United Kingdom. READ MORE: Tate Brothers Slapped With 38 New Charges In Expanding Sex Trafficking Case Andrew Tate is charged with rape and human trafficking related to three women, while Tristan is charged with 11 counts of similar crimes tied to one woman. The Crown Prosecution Service’s new charges include 19 counts of crimes related to illegal child images and pornography for Andrew Tate. The Tate brothers have denied all charges against them.

More and more adults are moving back in with their parents to save money, the Wall Street Journal recently reported. One of the subjects of the article remarks, “No one ever judges me. The conversation tends to be more like, ‘That’s awesome, and I bet you’re saving money.’” But it’s not awesome to be 33 years old and have no plans to move out of your parents’ house.  This article speaks to one of the issues young Americans are facing as they progress into adulthood: a total lack of self-reliance. But home prices are higher than they used to be! That may be true, but it does not justify an attitude of apathy. First of all, suck it up, buttercups. Rent an apartment until you can afford a house. Split the cost with some roommates. The challenges of today may be different from the challenges of the past, but that doesn’t mean they’re worse, and it certainly doesn’t mean they’re insurmountable. Your grandfather had problems too. He figured them out. Secondly, the high-cost argument would be more understandable if living with one’s parents was seen as an absolute last-ditch option for somebody who truly couldn’t afford independent living. The article makes clear, however, that the subjects feel no shame about living at home. They view it as a smart or “savvy” way to save some money.  This is where the problem lies. What young people should view as an unfortunate byproduct of a serious problem, they instead see as a perfectly reasonable solution. This is indicative of a culture that prioritizes material pleasure over pride and independence.  This culture of shamelessness is a large part of what’s driving the popularity of a socialist handout culture among American youth. When you strip away the cultural stigma on freeloading, people will expect their hand-outs to be institutionalized. “Not everybody has rich parents” no longer becomes a cause for living independently; it becomes a cause for manufacturing a state-sponsored “rich parent” for everyone else. Shame, to be clear, does not mean cruelty. There is, at least for now, a social stigma around being unemployed. This is not a license to abuse or bully the unemployed, nor does it mean that the unemployed should be stripped of their basic dignity. There is, however, an understanding among both the unemployed person and his peers that he is in an inferior situation and should be actively working to remedy it. He receives a lesser degree of social respect and, for that reason, is motivated to find a job. This type of shame should extend to broader situations, especially financial dependence. The entire concept of a welfare system requires a certain degree of shame in order to function. The difference between a social safety net and a nanny state is an inherent desire not to be the guy in the net.  If the proponents of the welfare state gave it a moment’s thought, they would see that shame is actually their ideal motivator. So often left-wingers decry the binary choice of “you work or you starve.” One would think they would be delighted to have a motivator that does not use the threat of danger or physical harm to motivate work. The objective has never been emergency support. It has been the destruction of the meritocracy.  Let’s be clear about something. It is shameful to be an adult who is unable to provide for yourself and your family. Whether you’re taking handouts from the government, your parents, or any other third party, if you’re not the one putting food on your child’s plate, you should be embarrassed.  That doesn’t mean that we should let your child starve, simply that we should differentiate between treating welfare as a safety valve whose necessity we all strive to eliminate and placing it on equal social footing with self-reliance. When we teach that there’s nothing shameful about failure, we naturally instill the lesson that there’s nothing prideful about success. More and more, young people are becoming alienated from the connection between hard work and the comforts that it brings. Whether they rely on government handouts or parental handouts, they live in comfort through no struggle or effort of their own. Can we really be surprised that they keep electing socialists? Conventional wisdom on the Right has always been that socialism looks attractive when you’re a kid living on Daddy’s credit card, but it becomes a lot less appealing once you’re out in the real world. Only nowadays are people living on Daddy’s (or the state’s) credit card well into adulthood.  The life of a dependent is bound to beget dependence. Perhaps the trend of young people taking longer to mature than their parents comes from the incessant culture of infantilization.  The epidemic of shamelessness is a failure on multiple fronts. It’s a failure of the grown men and women who see no issue with freeloading off their parents into adulthood. It’s a failure of the education system not to instill a sense of self-reliance. It’s also a failure on the part of the parents who never told their children it was time to move out.  Living at home when you’re 23 and when you’re 33 are two very different things. By never placing the responsibilities of adulthood on your children, you enable them to stay children forever. The sense of being owed handouts and the attitude that it is “thrifty” or “savvy” rather than pathetic to live on someone else’s dime is not localized to the Left. For far too many Republican populists, the question is not “Why are there so many handouts?” It’s “Where’s my piece of the pie?” None of this is to say that our problems aren’t real. Housing costs are high, and living independently has certain new challenges attached to it. But the solutions lie in tenacity, self-respect, and the individualist values that built our country. Not in surrendering to laziness and hedonism.  Young America, a little shame goes a long way. It’s time to grow up. *** This article is part of Upstream, The Daily Wire’s new home for culture and lifestyle. Real human insight and human stories — from our featured writers to you.