A US immigration judge ruled Friday that Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian organizer and Columbia University graduate, can be deported, siding with the Trump administration’s claim that Khalil’s beliefs and associations pose a threat to US foreign policy. The decision was based primarily on a memo from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, which cited Khalil’s political speech as grounds for removal under a rarely used immigration law provision.
Khalil, 30, was arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement on March 8 in New York and transferred to a detention facility in Jena, Louisiana. His attorneys say he is being targeted for helping lead pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University. The administration accused him of supporting Hamas and contributing to a hostile environment for Jewish students, though no criminal charges have been filed.
Give the gift of hope
We practice what we preach:
accurate, fearless journalism. But we can't do it alone.
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
- On the ground in Gaza, Syria, Israel, Egypt, Pakistan, and more
- Our program trained more than 100 journalists
- Calling out fake news and reporting real facts
Join us.
Support The Media Line. Save democracy.
Immigration Judge Jamee Comans ruled that Rubio’s memo alone was “presumptive and sufficient evidence,” rejecting defense requests to cross-examine the secretary or delay the proceedings.
Following the ruling, Khalil told the court that he had been treated unfairly and without due process. His wife, Noor Abdalla, said in a statement, “My husband is a political prisoner who is being deprived of his rights because he believes Palestinians deserve equal dignity and freedom.”
Khalil’s legal team, backed by the American Civil Liberties Union, plans to appeal and is challenging the legality of his detention in federal court.
Khalil is among several pro-Palestinian students and scholars recently detained or threatened with removal. Legal scholars warn the ruling could have a chilling effect on free speech, especially on US campuses.