New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, U.S. Lawmakers Urge India to Grant Bail to Activist Umar Khalid

Zohran Mamdani, who was sworn in Thursday as mayor of New York City, along with eight U.S. lawmakers, has publicly called on the Government of India to reconsider the continued detention of activist Umar Khalid and several others charged with terrorism-related offences linked to protests against the country’s Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in 2019–20.

The statements mark one of the most prominent foreign political interventions yet in the high-profile legal cases that have drawn sustained attention from human rights groups and international observers.

Calls for Bail After Years in Custody

Police in India have said that the protests against the CAA in February 2020 contributed to communal riots in the national capital, and subsequent investigations have resulted in terrorism-related charges against a group of activists. Of the 18 people charged under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and other statutes, 12 remain in jail and have repeatedly been denied bail as trials proceed.

U.S. lawmakers are urging New Delhi to reconsider the evidence and allow bail, citing concerns over due process.

In a joint letter dated December 30, 2025, members of the U.S. House of Representatives—including James McGovern, Jamie Raskin, Pramila Jayapal, Jan Schakowsky, Rashida Tlaib and Lloyd Doggett—along with Senators Chris Van Hollen and Peter Welch, wrote to India’s ambassador to the United States, Vinay Mohan Kwatra.

The letter states that the terrorism allegations against Khalid rely heavily on secret witness testimony and interpretations of speech, and calls the strength of the evidence “dubious.” It also notes that independent investigations by reputable rights groups have not found credible links between Khalid and terrorist activity.

“The strength of the evidence used to charge Mr Khalid with terrorism … is dubious,” the lawmakers wrote, urging India’s Supreme Court to grant bail in the pending legal proceedings.

Pressure Follows Diplomatic and Advocacy Meetings

The push by elected Democratic officials followed meetings between Khalid’s parents and several U.S. representatives during a recent visit to the United States.

Khalid’s father, S.Q.R. Ilyas, said he met Mamdani on December 9, 2025, during a personal trip. Ilyas told media that Mamdani asked how he could help and suggested connecting with U.S. lawmakers to request they write to Indian authorities.

Mamdani later penned a letter to Khalid, sharing encouragement and expressing solidarity. The letter, shared online by Khalid’s friend Banojyotsna Lahiri, states: “Umar, I think of your words on bitterness often, and the importance of not letting it consume one’s self … We are all thinking of you.”

In 2023, Mamdani had publicly read an open letter to Khalid at an event, affirming his support.

Broader Concerns Cited by U.S. Officials

In their letter, the U.S. lawmakers also referenced findings by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), stating that several individuals accused in these cases—including Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, Gulfisha Fatima and Khalid Saifi—had been identified as victims of violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief.

The bipartisan USCIRF has repeatedly raised concerns about religious freedom and civil liberties in India, prompting dialogue among U.S. policymakers and underscoring the international dimension of these legal cases.

India’s Position and Legal Context

The Indian government has maintained that its actions in response to the 2020 protests were guided strictly by law and security considerations and that the judiciary will determine the fate of the accused. Authorities have argued that the evidence against those charged—including alleged financing, speeches and preparatory acts—meets the threshold for continued detention under India’s anti-terror statute.

India’s Supreme Court is currently considering Khalid’s plea for bail. A decision on the matter is awaited in the coming weeks.

International Reactions and Diplomatic Sensitivities

The intervention by U.S. officials adds to a growing list of international voices urging respect for civil liberties and fair trial standards in cases involving activists and dissenters in India. While such foreign statements have drawn criticism from some Indian political leaders and commentators as interference in sovereign legal processes, rights advocates argue they reflect broader concerns over civil liberties and judicial independence.

As the legal process unfolds, developments in the case of Umar Khalid and others accused in the 2020 protests continue to draw attention both within India and internationally.