White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt
Gage Skidmore/Wikimedia Commons

The expensive footwear sat innocuously on Rama Duwaji's feet during a historic moment. Yet within hours, the $630 Miista boots had become a political flashpoint — evidence, according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, of rank hypocrisy at the heart of New York's new progressive leadership.

On Friday, Jan. 2, Leavitt, 28, launched an Instagram Stories broadside at Duwaji, 28, wife of newly inaugurated NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, 34, weaponising a single fashion choice into an indictment of Democratic economic policy. The attack exposed fault lines in how both sides of America's political divide interpret the symbols of power, wealth and authenticity.​

Duwaji had worn the designer boots to her husband's swearing-in ceremony on New Year's Day at the former City Hall subway station — a deliberately symbolic location chosen by Mamdani, who made history as New York's first Muslim mayor, first South Asian mayor and youngest mayor in over a century.

The moment should have been about representation and breaking barriers. Instead, one expensive fashion choice became the subject of White House criticism.​

Leavitt's attack was direct and unsparing. 'They want New Yorkers to hand over more than half their income to the government while she wears designer boots worth your weekly paycheck,' she wrote. 'Classic Communists — rules for you, but not for them. There are reasons Communism has failed everywhere it's been tried. Good luck, New York'.

Hypocrisy Attack: Designer Boots Become Political Ammunition

The controversy hinged on a glaring contradiction, as Leavitt saw it. Mamdani's entire mayoral platform rested on addressing New York's housing crisis — a promise that resonated with millions struggling to afford rent in an increasingly unaffordable city.

His campaign pledged universal childcare for children aged six weeks to five years old, rent control for nearly two million tenants, and five city-run supermarkets offering reasonably priced groceries. Yet his wife, adorned in designer luxury that costs more than most New Yorkers earn in a week, seemed to embody the very elitism his policies supposedly opposed.​

Leavitt, the pregnant mother-of-one who serves as Trump's spokesperson, seized on what she perceived as performative progressivism. If Mamdani truly believed in economic redistribution and shared sacrifice, the argument went, why would his wife flaunt such ostentatious wealth at his inauguration?​

Zohran Mamdani Democratic Socialist Vision: Radical Promises, Contradictory Symbols

Mamdani, however, appeared unfazed by the criticism. During his inauguration address, he leaned fully into his democratic socialist identity, declaring: 'I was elected as a democratic socialist, and I will govern as a democratic socialist. I will not abandon my principles for fear of being deemed radical'. He added: 'We may not always succeed. But never will we be accused of lacking the courage to try'.

Yet Leavitt's critique highlighted an uncomfortable reality: Mamdani's ambitious, multi-billion-dollar agenda requires funding mechanisms that sound daunting to ordinary earners. He has proposed higher taxes on wealthy residents and increased corporate rates — measures that, while not explicitly taking 'more than half' of anyone's income, imply significant wealth redistribution.

The optics of his wife wearing ultra-luxury goods while campaigning against inequality created an easy target for right-wing critics.​ The incident reveals how symbolic wealth — designer boots, luxury watches, expensive clothes — has become political currency in 21st-century America. For Leavitt and the Trump administration, Duwaji's footwear was evidence of elite hypocrisy. For Mamdani's supporters, it was a non-issue — the trivial targeting of a woman simply wearing something she liked to a significant personal moment.​

As Mamdani begins his tenure as the 112th mayor of New York City, his administration faces tests far more consequential than fashion choices. But in an era where every image is scrutinised and weaponised, even expensive boots can become symbols of larger political divides.

Writer's pick