Immigration judge rules student activist Mahmoud Khalil can be deported from US
Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil can be deported as a national security risk, an immigration judge in Louisiana ruled on Friday during a hearing over the legality of removing the activist who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations from the US.
Immigration Judge Jamee E Comans said, at the conclusion of a hearing in Jena, that the government's contention that Mr Khalil's presence in the United States posed 'potentially serious foreign policy consequences' was enough to satisfy requirements for his deportation.
Ms Comans said the government had 'established by clear and convincing evidence that he is removable'.
Lawyers for Mr Khalil are expected to appeal and a federal judge in New Jersey has temporarily barred his removal from the country.
Mr Khalil, a legal US resident, was detained by federal immigration agents on March 8 in the lobby of his university-owned apartment, the first arrest under President Donald Trump's promised crackdown on students who joined campus protests against the war in Gaza.
Within a day, he was flown across the country and taken to an immigration detention centre in Jena, thousands of miles from his attorneys and wife, a US citizen who is due to give birth soon.
Mr Khalil's lawyers have challenged the legality of his detention, saying the Trump administration is trying to crack down on free speech protected by the US Constitution.
US secretary of state Marco Rubio has cited a rarely used statute to justify Mr Khalil's deportation, which gives him the power to deport those who pose 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States'.
At Friday's hearing, Mr Khalil's lawyer, Marc Van Der Hout, told the judge that the government's submissions to the court prove the attempt to deport his client 'has nothing to do with foreign policy'.
Earlier this week, Ms Comans challenged the government to share proof that Mr Khalil should be expelled from the country for his role in campus protests against Israel and the war in Gaza.
She said if evidence does not support his removal, she would 'terminate the case on Friday'.
On Friday, Justice Department lawyers said in papers filed in federal court in Newark, New Jersey, that Ms Comans would not have the authority to immediately free Mr Khalil.
They said an immigration judge could determine if Mr Khalil is subject to deportation and then conduct a bail hearing afterwards if it is found that he is not.
Mr Khalil is not accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia.
The government, however, has said that non-citizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country for expressing views that the administration considers to be antisemitic and 'pro-Hamas', referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on October 7 2023.
Mr Khalil, a 30-year-old international affairs graduate student, had served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists at Columbia University who took over a campus lawn last spring to protest Israel's military campaign in Gaza.
The university brought police in to dismantle the encampment after a small group of protesters seized an administration building.
Mr Khalil is not accused of participating in the building occupation and was not among the people arrested in connection with the demonstrations.
But images of his maskless face at protests, along with his willingness to share his name with reporters, have made him an object of scorn among those who saw the protesters and their demands as anti-semitic.
The White House accused Mr Khalil of 'siding with terrorists', but has yet to cite any support for the claim.
Federal judges in New York and New Jersey have ordered the government not to deport Mr Khalil while his case plays out in court.
The Trump administration has said it is taking at least 400 million dollars in federal funding away from research programs at Columbia and its medical centre to punish it for not doing enough to fight what it considers to be anti-semitism on campus.
Some Jewish students and faculty complained about being harassed during the demonstrations or ostracised because of their faith or their support of Israel.
Immigration authorities have cracked down on other critics of Israel on college campuses, arresting a Georgetown University scholar who had spoken out on social media about the Israel-Gaza war, cancelling the student visas of some protesters and deporting a Brown University professor who they said had attended the Lebanon funeral of a leader of Hezbollah, another militant group that has fought with Israel.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Epoch Times
14 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
Trump Admin Can't Detain Mahmoud Khalil on Foreign Policy Grounds, Judge Rules
A federal judge ruled on June 11 that President Donald Trump's administration cannot use foreign policy interests to justify detaining Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University student who played a leading role in the pro-Palestinian protests that rocked the school across 2024. Khalil, a lawful permanent resident in the U.S., has proven that his continued detention is causing irreparable harm to his career, family, and free speech rights, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz


Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Judge says government must release Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil
Khalil's lawyers challenged the legality of his detention, accusing the Trump administration of trying to crack down on free speech. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio says he has the power to deport Khalil because his presence in the U.S. could harm foreign policy. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz had ruled earlier that expelling Khalil from the U.S. on those grounds was likely unconstitutional. Advertisement In a new ruling Wednesday, the judge said that Khalil had shown that his continued detention is causing irreparable harm to his career, his family and his free speech rights. Farbiarz gave the government until Friday to appeal the decision. He also required Khalil to post a $1 bond before he is freed. 'The court's decision is the most significant vindication yet of Mahmoud's rights,' said Ramzi Kassem, co-director of CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at the City University of New York that represents Khalil. 'But we aren't out of the woods until Mahmoud is free and back home with his wife and child.' Advertisement Lawyers and spokespersons for the Justice Department, which is handling the case, didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment. Dr. Noor Abdalla, the wife of Mahmoud Khalil, spoke during an unofficial alternative graduation ceremony on May 18, at St. Paul and St. Andrew United Methodist Church in upper Manhattan. TODD HEISLER/NYT The judge's decision comes after several other legal residents targeted for their activism won custody in recent weeks, including another Palestinian student at Columbia, Rubio has cited a rarely used statute to justify the deportation of Khalil and others, which gives him power to deport those who pose 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.' Khalil isn't accused of breaking any laws during the protests at Columbia. The government, however, has said that noncitizens who participate in such demonstrations should be expelled from the country for expressing views that the administration considers to be antisemitic and 'pro-Hamas,' referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Khalil, a 30-year-old international affairs graduate student, had served as a negotiator and spokesperson for student activists at Columbia University who took over a campus lawn last spring to protest Israel's military campaign in Gaza. The university brought police in to dismantle the encampment after a small group of protesters seized an administration building. Khalil is not accused of participating in the building occupation and wasn't among the people arrested in connection with the demonstrations. But images of his maskless face at protests, along with his willingness to share his name with reporters, have made him an object of scorn among those who saw the protesters and their demands as antisemitic. The White House accused Khalil of 'siding with terrorists,' but has yet to give any evidence for the claim. Advertisement The Trump administration has said it is taking at least $400 million in federal funding away from research programs at Columbia and its medical center to punish it for not doing enough to fight what it considers to be antisemitism on campus. Some Jewish students and faculty complained about being harassed during the demonstrations or ostracized because of their faith or their support of Israel.


Fox News
30 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump tells judge he does not need Newsom's permission to crack down on rioters, deploy National Guard
The Justice Department on Wednesday doubled down on its assertion that President Donald Trump has the authority to call up U.S. National Guard troops in California, describing Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's emergency lawsuit to block his action as a "crass political stunt" that risks "endangering American lives." At issue in the case is whether Trump, as commander in chief, has the authority to federalize the National Guard against the express wishes or consent of a state governor. Both sides are slated to appear in court Friday while a judge weighs California's request for injunctive relief. In the new court filing, lawyers for the administration said Trump, as president, has "no obligation" to consult with, or even to notify, Newsom before federalizing the National Guard. "The extraordinary relief plaintiffs request would judicially countermand the Commander in Chief's military directives – and would do so in the posture of a temporary restraining order, no less," lawyers for the Trump administration said in the filing. "That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema," they added. "And it would be dangerous." That argument is unlikely to sit well with Newsom. And it comes one day after California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Tuesday sued the Trump administration over what the state described as the president's unlawful action in federalizing the National Guard, which they noted was carried out without Newsom's consent. Bonta argued in the lawsuit that Trump's actions were both inappropriate and illegal, since he did not first seek Newsom's permission to federalize the troops. National Guard units fall under the dual control of state and federal governments, and any action to mobilize the units typically goes through the respective state governor first. The judge overseeing the case declined the state's request for a temporary restraining order blocking Trump's actions but ordered both parties to court Friday to consider the request for broader injunctive relief. At issue is 10 U.S.C. § 12406, or the law that Trump invoked in his memo late last week to call up the National Guard. The law allows presidents to deploy the National Guard and other troops at the federal level in the event of "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the U.S. government. In that case, the law says the president "may call into federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State in such numbers as he considers necessary to repel the invasion, suppress the rebellion, or execute those laws." But lawyers for Newsom told the court that Trump lacked the power to federalize the troops under Section 12406, since the immigration protests, in their view, did not amount to a rebellion. "At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection. Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past, including in recent years," they told the court. A group of 26 Republican state attorneys general from filed an amicus brief siding with Trump one day earlier, arguing that his decision to federalize the National Guard to address ICE riots and protests that broke out in parts of the state was the "right response." "In California, we're seeing the results of leadership that excuses lawlessness and undermines law enforcement," the attorneys general wrote in the statement, first provided to Fox News Digital. "When local and state officials won't act, the federal government must."