Deporting Dissent: The Dangerous Precedent Set By The Persecution Of Pro-Palestine Activists
'Rights are granted to those who align with power,' Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student, eloquently wrote from his cell. This poignant statement came soon after a judge ruled that the government had met the legal threshold to deport the young activist on the nebulous ground of 'foreign policy'.
'For the poor, for people of color, for those who resist injustice, rights are but words written on water,' Khalil further lamented. The plight of this young man, whose sole transgression appears to be his participation in the nationwide mobilization to halt the Israeli genocide in Gaza, should terrify all Americans. This concern should extend even to those who are not inclined to join any political movement and possess no particular sympathy for – or detailed knowledge of – the extent of the Israeli atrocities in Gaza, or the United States' role in bankrolling this devastating conflict.
The perplexing nature of the case against Khalil, like those against other student activists, including Turkish visa holder Rümeysa Öztürk, starkly indicates that the issue is purely political. Its singular aim appears to be the silencing of dissenting political voices.
Judge Jamee E. Comans, who concurred with the Trump Administration's decision to deport Khalil, cited 'foreign policy' in an uncritical acceptance of the language employed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Rubio had previously written to the court, citing 'potentially serious foreign policy consequences' stemming from Khalil's actions, which he characterized as participation in 'disruptive activities' and 'anti-Semitic protests'.
The latter accusation has become the reflexive rejoinder to any form of criticism leveled against Israel, a tactic prevalent even long before the current catastrophic genocide in Gaza.
Those who might argue that US citizens remain unaffected by the widespread US government crackdowns on freedom of expression must reconsider. On April 14, the government decided to freeze $2.2 billion in federal funding to the University of Harvard.
Beyond the potential weakening of educational institutions and their impact on numerous Americans, these financial measures also coincide with a rapidly accelerating and alarming trend of targeting dissenting voices within the US, reaching unprecedented extents. On April 14, Massachusetts immigration lawyer Nicole Micheroni, a US citizen, publicly disclosed receiving a message from the Department of Homeland Security requesting her self-deportation.
Furthermore, new oppressive bills are under consideration in Congress, granting the Department of Treasury expansive measures to shut down community organizations, charities, and similar entities under various pretenses and without adhering to standard constitutional legal procedures.
Many readily conclude that these measures reflect Israel's profound influence on US domestic politics and the significant ability of the Israel lobby in Washington DC to interfere with the very democratic fabric of the US, whose Constitution's First Amendment guarantees freedom of speech and assembly.
While there is much truth in that conclusion, the narrative extends beyond the complexities of the Israel-Palestine issue.
For many years, individuals, predominantly academics, who championed Palestinian rights were subjected to trials or even deported, based on 'secret evidence'. This essentially involved a legal practice that amalgamated various acts, such as the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), among others, to silence those critical of US foreign policy.
Although some civil rights groups in the US challenged the selective application of law to stifle dissent, the matter hardly ignited a nationwide conversation regarding the authorities' violations of fundamental democratic norms, such as due process (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments).
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, however, much of that legal apparatus was applied to all Americans in the form of the PATRIOT Act. This legislation broadened the government's authority to employ surveillance, including electronic communications, and other intrusive measures.
Subsequently, it became widely known that even social media platforms were integrated into government surveillance efforts. Recent reports have even suggested that the government mandated social media screening for all U.S. visa applicants who have traveled to the Gaza Strip since January 1, 2007.
In pursuing these actions, the US government is effectively replicating some of the draconian measures imposed by Israel on the Palestinians. The crucial distinction, based on historical experience, is that these measures tend to undergo continuous evolution, establishing legal precedents that swiftly apply to all Americans and further compromise their already deteriorating democracy.
Americans are already grappling with their perception of their democratic institutions, with a disturbingly high number of 72 percent, according to a Pew Research Center survey in April 2024, believing that US democracy is no longer a good example for other countries to follow.
The situation has only worsened in the past year. While US activists advocating for justice in Palestine deserve unwavering support and defense for their profound courage and humanity, Americans must also recognize that they, and the remnants of their democracy, are equally at risk.
'Our defense is in the preservation of the spirit which prizes liberty as the heritage of all men, in all lands, everywhere,' is the timeless quote associated with Abraham Lincoln. Yet, every day that Mahmoud Khalil and others spend in their cells, awaiting deportation, stands as the starkest violation of that very sentiment. Americans must not permit this injustice to persist.
– Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is ' Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak Out'. His other books include 'My Father was a Freedom Fighter' and 'The Last Earth'. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Whether to recognise a grey waste of dust and rubble
Christopher Luxon has announced that by late September 2025, New Zealand might be ready to recognise Palestinian statehood. This curiously equivocal statement contrasts sharply with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's firm commitment to recognise that unfortunate entity. Australia's pledge matches those already given by France, the United Kingdom, and Canada. Of New Zealand's Five Eyes partners, only the United States stands unequivocally behind Israel. Benjamin Netanyahu's list of reliable allies grows thin. Does New Zealand's reticence merit the criticisms levelled at it by supporters of the Palestinian cause? When Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong can tell journalists Australia is moving to recognise Palestine "while there is still a Palestine to recognise", then, surely, New Zealand awaiting the outcome of the monstrous events convulsing Gaza and the West Bank is wise? It might also be prudent to ascertain exactly what sort of "state" New Zealand is being called upon to recognise. If we are talking about the partitioned territory offered to the Palestinians in 1947, the boundaries of which the Palestinian authorities, such as they were at the time, emphatically rejected, then the harsh truth of the matter is that, within those boundaries, there is precious little left out of which a recognisable state of any kind could be fashioned. As anyone who watches the news networks is only too aware, the Gaza Strip (as it was known in 1947) has been turned into a grey waste of dust and rubble. In their biblically ferocious quest for vengeance, the Israeli Defence Force has done its best (and its best is terrifying) to leave not one stone standing upon another. Indeed, not since Rome conquered Carthage has the victors' determination to utterly destroy their enemy been so openly displayed. Roman historian Tacitus famously observed: "Rome makes a desert and calls it peace." Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu goes one better. He will not even talk of peace until he has made a desert strewn with the bones of Hamas' fighters out of Gaza. The West Bank is larger than Gaza, but only marginally more favoured. Bisected by walls, bedevilled by endless checkpoints, its people are hemmed in on every side. Israeli soldiers and their bulldozers flatten whole blocks of the West Bank's beleaguered towns. The flower of Palestinian youth — those whose slingshot stones have not been repaid with the explosive bullets of Israeli snipers — rot in Israeli jails. Their grandparents' olive groves burn in the night, their livestock are driven off. Those who venture out bravely in search of their stolen goats are beaten, stabbed, shot. Because not all the hills of the West Bank have been disfigured by the Israeli occupation. Cascading down some hillsides are the gleaming homes and lush gardens of the settler communities. As beautiful as they are illegal these settlements are peopled by fanatics every bit as bright-eyed and implacable as Hamas. When it comes to their Palestinian "neighbours", there is only one state these settlers wish to recognise — their absence. There was a time when the "two-state solution" promoted by the United Nations seemed a viable prospect. So much so that, with generous donations from the backers of a free, democratic, and independent Palestine, its presumptive rulers commenced constructing an impressive parliamentary complex for its legislators to sit in. Elegant of line, impressive in its austere functionality, the structure took shape in Abu Dis a neighbourhood of East Jerusalem — the designated capital of the Palestinian state. In 2003, however, construction ceased. The Second Palestinian Intifada (uprising) was in the process of suffocating the Oslo Peace Accords in tear-gas, shrapnel and blood. The Israelis responded by building their infamous "Separation Wall". From the river to the sea there would be only one state. Palestine's half-completed Parliament is still there, a dark and cavernous testimonial to diplomatic and moral failure. The building's grey concrete walls are stained, as if by the tears of all those on both sides of the conflict who were forced to abandon their dream of a peaceful two-state future. Nations presenting Palestinian recognition as a panacea should be made to argue their case from the cold concrete platforms of that doomed and gloomy monument. Hopefully, Christopher Luxon knows better than to sit there with them. ■ Chris Trotter is an Auckland writer and commentator.
Scoop
3 hours ago
- Scoop
A Shield Of Lies: Netanyahu's Battle Against The World
It was a sign of someone desperate that his message has failed to take wing and make its way to better lands. With the strategy of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Gaza Strip sundered and falling over, leaving only a thick butcher's bill (over 60,000 deaths for starters), extraordinary suffering and humanitarian catastrophe, he thought it wise to confront foreign press outlets on a late Sunday in the hope that the tide might turn away from his exemplary viciousness. There had been, he moaned like a wounded starlet, a 'global campaign of lies' about Israel's war in Gaza. In doing so, he merely inflated the arguments against him with boisterous credit and almost irrefutable plausibility. The conference, which gave 'an opportunity to puncture the lies and tell the truth,' involved the following points: Hamas still has thousands of fighters in Gaza; it vowed to repeat what it had done on October 7, 2023; it continued to expound the goal of wishing to destroy Israel even as it subjugated Gazans, stole their precious food, and shot those seeking to move to safe zones, the latter term being itself a monstrosity in the context of this conflict. Paternally, Netanyahu as the punishing father figure, thought he had deciphered the true desire of those in Gaza, which presumably would not have entailed the killing of Palestinians by the tens of thousands and starving the rest. Everything could be blamed on a militant organisation he had done so much to praise as a countering force against Fatah in the West Bank. As things stood now, Gazans seemed to be suffering from a highly developed sense of Stockholm's syndrome, 'begging us, and they're begging the world: 'Free us, Free us, and free Gaza from Hamas'.' With a solid body of mendacity to work with, Netanyahu proceeded to build an edifice of fantasy few others outside Israel could contend with: that the same Israeli forces who starve, kill and maim the civilian populace of the Strip have no wish to impose an occupation but 'free it from Hamas terrorists. The war can end tomorrow if Gaza, or rather if Hamas lays down its arms and releases all the remaining hostages.' Israeli policy was not one of starving the Palestinians into famine wrecks, skeletal ruin and physiological malfunction. That hideous criminal pursuit fell to Hamas, apparently responsible for the violent looting of aid trucks and the deliberate creation of 'a shortage of supply.' Fantastically, Netanyahu blamed the United Nations for refusing 'to distribute the thousands of trucks that we let into Gaza through the Kerem Shalom crossing,' a delightful complaint given his government's overt hatred for a body he always wished to be rid of from the occupied territories. The synapses in Netanyahu-Land seemed frailer than ever, if not altogether snapped. He then belted out the now familiar five-point vision of the Strip once Hamas is defeated. This elusive 'day after' includes the following objectives: the disarming of Hamas, the freeing of all hostages, the demilitarising of the Gaza Strip, granting Israel 'overriding security control', the creation of a non-Israeli administration that will not 'educate its children for terror, doesn't pay terrorists and doesn't launch terrorist attacks against Israel.' Unlike other proposals advanced by France, the UK and Canada, the Palestinian Authority is also excluded from the arrangements, since no Palestinian politician is worth the Israeli PM's time. Netanyahu's idea of a politically viable Palestinian is one manacled to the security regime of other powers. The stage for the next slaughter is set, namely, the dismantling of 'the two remaining Hamas strongholds in Gaza City and the Central Camps. Contrary to false claims, this is the best way to end the war, and the best way to end it speedily.' Netanyahu feigns a humanitarian streak in stating that the civilian population will be allowed to 'leave the combat areas to designated safe zones.' The process of ethnic cleansing, or simply cleansing of the population, is to simply continue. Oblivious to Netanyahu's fortified wall of prejudice is that much of the groundwork for precisely those outcomes he hopes to avoid have already been laid. Whether it be Hamas or any other militant organisation, the notion of pacifist subordinate figures content with their status in any territory where Israel has the last word on everything is absurdly unrealistic. Doing everything to make his case even less convincing, Netanyahu then told Israeli journalists after seeing the foreign scribblers off that he had never halted all humanitarian aid to Gaza. Even the patriotic Times of Israel found this a bit rich, noting that 'his government had enacted that policy earlier this year.' The paper went on to quote the announcement from the premier's office on March 2: 'Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided that, as of this morning, all entry of goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will cease.' Netanyahu also refused to accept the proposition that Gaza's population was starving. Shortages in supply yes; starvation no. 'If we had wanted starvation, if that had been our policy, 2 million Gazans wouldn't be living today after 20 months.' The same could be said about the supreme crime of all: 'if we wanted to commit genocide, it would have taken exactly one afternoon.' A wise head might have told him that few who commit genocide or engineer circumstances of mass murder ever make the intention that obvious.
Scoop
16 hours ago
- Scoop
Gaza: Israel Threatens To Ban Major Aid Organizations As Starvation Deepens
Over 100 organisations call for an end to Israel's weaponization of aid Despite claims by Israeli authorities that there is no limit on humanitarian aid entering Gaza, most major international NGOs have been unable to deliver a single truck of lifesaving supplies since 2 March. Instead of clearing the growing backlog of goods, Israeli authorities have rejected requests from dozens of NGOs to bring in lifesaving goods, citing that these organizations are "not authorized to deliver aid." In July alone, over 60 requests were denied under this justification. This obstruction has left millions of dollars' worth of food, medicine, water, and shelter items stranded in warehouses across Jordan and Egypt, while Palestinians are being starved. "Anera has over $7 million worth of lifesaving supplies ready to enter Gaza - including744 tons of rice, enough for six million meals, blocked in Ashdod just kilometres away," said Sean Carroll, President and CEO of Anera. Many of the NGOs now told they are not "authorized" to deliver aid have worked in Gaza for decades, are trusted by communities and experienced in delivering aid safely. Their exclusion has left hospitals without basic supplies, children, people with disabilities, and older people dying from hunger and preventable illnesses, and aid workers themselves going to work hungry. The obstruction is tied to new INGO registration rules introduced in March. Under these new rules, registration can be denied on the basis of vague and politicized criteria, such as alleged "delegitimization" of the state of Israel. INGOs warned the process was designed to control independent organizations, silence advocacy, and censor humanitarian reporting. This new bureaucratic obstruction is inconsistent with established international law as it entrenches Israel's control and annexation of the occupied Palestinian territory. Unless INGOs submit to the full registration requirements, including the mandatory submission of details of private donors, complete Palestinian staff lists and other sensitive information about personnel for so-called "security" vetting to Israeli authorities, many could be forced to halt operations in Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and remove all international staff within 60 days. Some organizations have even been issued a seven-day ultimatum to provide Palestinian staff lists. NGOs have made clear that sharing such data is unlawful (including under relevant data protection laws), unsafe, and incompatible with humanitarian principles. In the deadliest context for aid workers worldwide, where 98 percent of those humanitarians killed were Palestinian, NGOs have no guarantees that handing over such information would not put staff at further risk, or be used to advance the government of Israel's stated military and political aims. Today, INGOs' fears have proven true: the registration system is now being used to further block aid and deny food and medicine in the midst of the worst-case scenario of famine. "Since the full siege was imposed on 2 March, CARE has not been able to deliver any of our $1.5 million worth of pre-positioned supplies into Gaza," said Jolien Veldwijk, Country Director of CARE. "This includes critical shipments of food parcels, medical supplies, hygiene kits, dignity kits, and maternal and infant care items. Our mandate is to save lives, but due to the registration restrictions civilians are being left without the food, medicine, and protection they urgently need." "Oxfam has over $2.5 million worth of goods that have been rejected from entering Gaza by Israel, especially WASH and hygiene items as well as food," said Bushra Khalidi, Oxfam Policy Lead. "This registration process signals to INGOs that their ability to operate may come at the cost of their independence and ability to speak out." These restrictions are part of a broader strategy that includes the so-called "GHF" scheme - a militarized distribution mechanism promoted as a humanitarian solution. In reality, it is a deadly tool of control, with at least 859 Palestinians killed around "GHF" sites since it began operating. "The militarized food distribution scheme has weaponized starvation and curated suffering. Distributions at GHF sites have resulted in extreme levels of violence and killings, primarily of young Palestinian men, but also of women and children, who have gone to the sites in the hope of receiving food," according to Aitor Zabalgogeazkoa, MSF emergency coordinator in Gaza. Both the "GHF" scheme and the INGO registration process aim to block impartial aid, exclude Palestinian actors, and replace trusted humanitarian organizations with mechanisms that serve political and military objectives. They come as the government of Israel escalates its military offensive and deepens its occupation in Gaza, making clear these measures are part of a broader strategy to entrench control and erase Palestinian presence. "At this point, everyone knows what the correct, humane answer is, and it's not a floating pier, airdrops or the "GHF." The answer, to save lives, save humanity and save yourselves from complicity in engineered mass starvation, is to open all the borders, at all hours, to the thousands of trucks, millions of meals and medical supplies, ready and waiting nearby," said Sean Carroll of Anera. We call on all states and donors to: Press Israel to end the weaponization of aid, including through bureaucratic obstruction, such as the INGO registration procedures. Insist that INGOs are not forced to share sensitive personal information, in violation of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), or compromise staff safety or independence as a condition for delivering aid. Demand the immediate and unconditional opening of all land crossings and conditions for the delivery of lifesaving humanitarian aid.
