Mahmoud Khalil seeks $20M from the Trump administration -- or an apology
Khalil, who was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for more than three months as the Trump administration pushed for his deportation, alleges false arrest and imprisonment, malicious prosecution, intentional infliction of emotional distress and other alleged wrongdoings.
The complaint, a precursor to a federal lawsuit, was filed under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
MORE: Trial challenging administration's deportation of pro-Palestinian scholars gets underway
According to the Center for Constitutional Rights, the organization representing Khalil, the Columbia graduate would use the money to 'help others similarly targeted by the Trump administration and Columbia University.'
In a press release, the organization said: 'He would accept, in lieu of payment, an official apology and abandonment of the administration's unconstitutional policy."
Khalil, 30, helped lead and negotiate on behalf of the pro-Palestinian encampments that spread at Columbia during the spring of 2024, amid the Israel-Hamas war.
Khalil, a green card holder married to a U.S. citizen, was detained by ICE agents in his New York apartment building in March -- the first high-profile pro-Palestinian activist to be detained by ICE during the administration of President Donald Trump, who had vowed to "crush" the campus protests, calling them hotbeds of antisemitism.
MORE: Mahmoud Khalil vows to keep fighting for Palestinians after release from ICE custody
Khalil was transferred to an ICE facility in Louisiana, while the Trump administration pressed in court for his deportation.
The Trump administration said Khalil was detained for his purported support of Hamas -- a claim his legal team has rejected and for which the administration provided no evidence.
In court proceedings earlier this year, Secretary of State Marco Rubio -- citing a rarely used provision of the law -- determined Khalil should be deported because his continued presence in the country would pose a risk to U.S. foreign policy.
An immigration judge in Louisiana initially found Khalil deportable, but a federal judge in New Jersey later issued an order barring the Trump administration from deporting or continuing to detain Khalil on that basis.
Khalil was released from custody on June 20, but the Trump administration is continuing to seek his deportation.
MORE: Mahmoud Khalil, in 1st broadcast interview, says he'll continue to 'advocate for what's right'
Khalil's complaint also accuses the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and ICE of conducting a 'retaliatory arrest' against Khalil over his constitutionally protected speech.
"Officials at the highest levels of the United States government publicly lashed out at Mr. Khalil on social media, falsely labeling him a terrorist sympathizer and an anti-semite — derogatory charges designed to destroy Mr. Khalil's reputation, put him in physical danger and cause extreme emotional distress,' the complaint stated.
In a statement to ABC News, DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said the Trump administration acted within its legal and constitutional authority to detain Khalil.
"Mahmoud Khalil's claim that DHS officials branded him as an antisemite and terrorized him and his family is absurd," McLaughlin said in the statement. "It was Khalil who terrorized Jewish students on campus. He 'branded' himself as antisemite through his own hateful behavior and rhetoric. It is a privilege to be granted a visa or green card to live and study in the United States of America."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump reportedly signs order granting another 90-day extension on harshest China tariffs
President Trump on Monday signed an executive order implementing another 90-day pause on additional tariffs on China that were set to take effect on Tuesday, reports said. The move again pushes off a deadline for imposing the harshest taxes on Chinese imports as the two sides continue negotiations on a deal. Reports from CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post all said the president had signed the order, which will push the deadline for these tariffs back to Nov. 9. The White House didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The extension appears to mean that headline rates agreed to in May of 30% on Chinese imports and 10% on American goods will continue for the immediate future and avoid a snap-back to previous triple-digit levels. Sector-specific tariffs on goods like steel and some medical supplies will keep the effective tariff rate between the two countries higher. The reported tariff agreement also comes amid an increased focus from Trump in recent days on Russia and the war in Ukraine, with Trump putting an additional 25% tariff on imports from India over that nation's consumption of Russian oil. The new pause could also increase the odds for a meeting later this year between Presidents Trump and Xi. The two men's teams have both floated the concept of a face-to-face meeting, perhaps as soon as the coming Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea at the end of October. Monday's announcement also came after three meetings of the two trade teams in recent months — gatherings that took place in Geneva in May, London in June, and Stockholm in July — resulted in signs of progress though tensions remain between the two sides. He Lifeng, China's vice premier for economic policy, has represented his country at all three meetings. A representative for He — Chinese trade negotiator Li Chenggang — said after the most recent round in Sweden that the two sides had 'candid exchanges over their economic concerns,' according to a translation. Certain issues like semiconductors, including a plan to allow the resumption of Nvidia's (NVDA) AI chip exports to China, as well as Chinese exports of rare earth minerals have been most in focus of the talks so far with a long list of issues between the two nations still to discuss. Over the weekend, the Trump administration struck a deal with Nvidia and AMD to allow those chipmakers to sell some chips into the Chinese market in exchange for a 15% cut of the sales.
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Maine can't enforce foreign election interference law that appeals court calls unconstitutional
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) — Maine can't enforce a voter-approved foreign election interference law that a federal appeals court said likely violates the Constitution by limiting political donations. Voters overwhelmingly approved a ban on foreign governments and companies with 5% or more foreign government ownership from donating to state referendum races. The law is one of a handful around the country that attempt to limit foreign influence on U.S. elections. The law has been on hold pending federal lawsuits from utilities companies and media organizations that raise constitutional challenges about it. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston said in court papers in July that it affirmed a lower-court ruling that the law likely violates the First Amendment. 'The prohibition is overly broad, silencing U.S. corporations based on the mere possibility that foreign shareholders might try to influence its decisions on political speech, even where those foreign shareholders may be passive owners that exercise no influence or control over the corporation's political spending," wrote Judge Lara Montecalvo. The matter was sent back to the lower court, where it will proceed, and there has been no substantive movement on it in recent weeks, said Danna Hayes, a spokesperson for the Maine attorney general's office, on Monday. The law is on the state's books, but the state cannot enforce it while legal challenges are still pending, Hayes said. Voters approved the law in 2023 by a margin of 86% to 14%. It followed a multimillion-dollar effort by a Canadian-owned utility to influence a project in Maine in which it's a partner. The law reflects the will of Maine residents to ensure clean elections, said Rick Bennett, chair of Protect Maine Elections, the committee formed to support the 2023 ballot initiative. He said the fight to save the law was still ongoing. 'Mainers spoke with one voice: our elections should belong to us, not to corporations owned or influenced by foreign governments whose interests may not align with our own,' Bennett said in a statement. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
3 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House Judiciary Committee Queries Major Sports Leagues On Whether They Still Should Get Antitrust Exemption For Broadcast TV Blackouts
The House Judiciary Committee is requesting a briefing from the heads of the NFL, NBA, Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League on whether they should still get an antitrust exemption for coordinating TV broadcast rights, including a rule that allows for game blackouts. The Sports Broadcasting Act gives leagues immunity for broadcasting deals for games on network television, including provisions that permit blackouts of home games in that team's broadcast area. Such blackout requirements were meant to ensure that ticket sales remained robust in a market. More from Deadline Donald Trump Says He's Deploying National Guard In D.C., Placing Metropolitan Police Under Federal Control Donald Trump Lashes Out At Paul Krugman As "Deranged Bum"; "Now This Is Flattering," Economist Responds Kristi Noem Didn't Laugh Off 'South Park' Satire: "It Never Ends, But It's So Lazy" In letters sent on Monday, Judiciary Committee chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), who chairs an antitrust subcommittee, wrote that despite the rise of subscription services and online streaming, 'it is sometimes more difficult and more expensive for some fans to watch their teams during the season. In some major sports leagues, a fan may need to sign up for multiple streaming platforms and purchase an over-the-air antenna to watch every game at home. Even then, because every major sports league has its own blackout restrictions, there are certain games that fans cannot watch at home regardless of how much they are willing to pay or how many streaming services they purchase.' The Sports Broadcasting Act antitrust exemption applies to 'sponsored telecasting,' Jordan and Fitzgerald noted, noting that courts have ruled that it does not apply to cable, satellite, pay-per-view and streaming. 'The majority of sports viewership now occurs outside of traditional network broadcasting,' they wrote. 'As a result, most of the distribution agreements that a sports league enters into are subject to antitrust challenges, while a narrow subset are not, creating legal uncertainty, distorting the market, and 'effectively expanding the blind spot for potential antitrust violations.'' Their letters gave the league heads until August 25 to set up a of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media 'The Boys' Season 5: Everything We Know So Far
