Manhattan Institute

What sent Rafael A. Mangual down an intellectual rabbit hole? Watch today's City Journal Podcast with Daniel Di Martino and Tal Fortgang to find out: https://lnkd.in/e7FwvuEM

This week, MI scholars explore how ideology and institutional pressures shape medicine, law, academia, and public policy—and what it takes to uphold integrity in each. Senior fellow Abigail Shrier wrote an essay for The Free Press about her son’s rare illness that thrust the family into a world of surgeons and pediatric cancer wards, and revealed to her the fierce strength inherent in parenthood. In City Journal, fellow Colin Wright examines a Supreme Court case testing whether Colorado’s “conversion therapy” ban violates a counselor’s First Amendment right to offer voluntary talk therapy to minors seeking to accept their biological sex. Medical associations are supposed to base policy on science, not ideology, writes fellow Joseph Figliolia in a new report on institutional capture and gender medicine policy. After resigning as Manhattan’s U.S. attorney, senior fellow Danielle Sassoon found that while law schools eagerly invite her to speak on civil dialogue, they often fail to uphold it—caving to student protesters who silence speakers they dislike, she writes in the The New York Times. Finally, fellow Robert VerBruggen builds on his new report on gunshot-detection technology with a column about the tradeoffs for policymakers in City Journal. For the latest from MI and City Journal, subscribe to our newsletter: https://lnkd.in/eriGg5NU

Across the U.S., medical societies have marched in lockstep on “gender-affirming care.” But a new Manhattan Institute investigation shows that this apparent consensus was manufactured—not scientific. In a new report, policy analyst Joseph Figliolia examines how a small bloc inside the Texas Medical Association (TMA)—an affiliate of the American Medical Association—used procedural power to shape policy on pediatric gender medicine. Outsized influence: TMA’s LGBTQ Health Section became the de-facto authority on gender medicine. Its members sat on key committees where roughly 92% of recommendations are automatically adopted. “Trojan horse” tactics: Internal transcripts reveal that activists used vague language and even medical students to advance controversial policies—quietly, and without full debate. Member backlash ignored: An internal TMA survey found only 1% of members listed “affirming care” as a top organizational priority. Yet leadership continued to speak on behalf of all 55,000 members while disregarding conflict-of-interest warnings. The 2025 turning point: When members requested an independent review of TMA’s gender-care policies—17 testified in favor, 3 against—activists on the review committee cut off debate and blocked reform. Figliolia calls this “committee capture”—when small, ideologically aligned groups dominate policymaking through procedural control, silencing dissent and sidelining evidence. Reform starts with: • Transparent committee processes • Strong conflict-of-interest policies • Independent evidence reviews • A renewed commitment to open discourse in medicine Read the full report: https://lnkd.in/eyTwJCCh

Has Big Tech’s political center of gravity begun to move? In the latest "Tech and the City" episode, MI fellow Sanjana Friedman explores Salesforce CEO Mark Benioff’s political evolution—from championing progressive causes in San Francisco to advocating tougher measures on urban challenges. His shift may reflect a broader reassessment among tech leaders as frustration grows with progressive governance in cities like San Francisco.

This week, MI scholars bring sharp analysis and principled perspective to issues spanning foreign policy, healthcare spending, constitutional law, and education reform. Tuesday this week marked the second anniversary of Hamas’s October 7 terrorist attack against Israel.  In a column for The Free Press, senior fellow Douglas Murray considers the stakes of the war both within the Jewish state and without. In a column for the New York Post, senior fellow Chris Pope shows the math behind Republicans’ assertion that Democrats use federal funds and Medicaid subsidies to pay for the healthcare of unlawful immigrants. In other news this week, director of constitutional studies Ilya Shapiro highlights the most significant court cases the U.S. Supreme Court will hear this term, in City Journal. Also in City Journal, adjunct fellow and civil rights organizer Wai Wah Chin warns against embracing mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani’s proposal to phase out the gifted and talented program in New York City schools. For the latest from MI and City Journal, subscribe to our newsletter: https://lnkd.in/eriGg5NU

Should cities keep gunshot detection tech—or scrap it? A new Manhattan Institute report by Robert VerBruggen takes a hard, data-driven look at gunshot detection technology (GDT), including ShotSpotter—assessing accuracy, equity, effectiveness, and cost. What the evidence shows: - Placement & equity: Sensors are concentrated where gun violence is highest. These areas are often minority neighborhoods because the violence is concentrated there—not because of biased siting. - Accuracy: Independent tests generally find high accuracy. Many alerts don’t yield physical evidence—but that doesn’t equal “false”; revolvers and quick cleanups leave no casings. - Effect on policing: GDT gets officers to scenes faster, surfaces incidents that never trigger 911 calls, and boosts evidence recovery (shell casings, abandoned guns). Crime outcomes: Most studies don’t show clear reductions in shootings or higher clearance rates—effects may be small, city-specific, and depend on implementation. Costs: ~$65K–$90K per square mile per year—typically <1% of big-city police budgets. Even small improvements (e.g., preventing a single homicide) can justify the expense in high-violence areas. Bottom line: GDT is neither a panacea nor a racist surveillance tool. It’s a marginal yet potentially valuable investigative aid—if departments have the staffing and infrastructure (e.g., Real-Time Crime Centers, Crime Gun Intelligence Centers) to act on the alerts. Prioritize staffing, evidence processing, and investigative capacity first. Then decide if GDT’s added information is worth the price in your city. Read the full report: https://lnkd.in/ggRTzmf5

We are excited to announce that Daniel Golliher has joined the Manhattan Institute as a cities fellow focusing on housing, public order, and the institutions that shape everyday life in New York. Look for Daniel's work in the Bigger Apple newsletter. Subscribe today: https://lnkd.in/e-gkNpSk

On the two-year anniversary of Hamas’s October 7 attacks on Israel, Stu Smith, Neetu Arnold, Adam Lehodey, and Rafael A. Mangual reflect on national and global reactions to the attacks, especially on American university campuses. Watch the entire new episode of the City Journal Podcast: https://lnkd.in/eTFP-wmz

Every few years, NYC re-litigates the same question: Should we test 4-year-olds for “gifted” programs — or scrap them for equity’s sake? But the real problem isn’t who gets accelerated — it’s that the floor is too low. Families with means buy into strong zones or spend thousands on test prep. Others just leave. For low-income parents, charters — now serving nearly 15% of public-school students — are the only alternative. In places like Finland or Singapore, parents don’t panic over school placement because every school delivers competent instruction. In NYC, the gulf between the best and worst schools makes every “gifted” seat feel like a lifeline. Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani wants to end accelerated programs before high school. But without raising the baseline first, that could narrow opportunity even more. Mississippi proved reform works — phonics, accountability, teacher coaching. NYC should build on that. With Eric Adams out and Mamdani leading the mayoral race, NYC’s education future is on the ballot. Subscribe to MI's Bigger Apple newsletter for sharp analysis on schools, politics, and policy in NYC: https://lnkd.in/e-gkNpSk

“Abundance bros” are on the rise—but what does this techno-optimist movement say about our current politics? Watch the entire new episode of the City Journal Podcast featuring Rafael A. Mangual, Charles Fain Lehman, and Jesse Arm: https://lnkd.in/eNUhvZ3U