A U.S. judge has ruled that Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate and permanent resident detained for pro-Palestinian protests, can be deported. Although he has not been charged with a crime, the government cites a Cold War-era law claiming his presence threatens American foreign policy. Khalil’s legal team plans to appeal the ruling and argues that the deportation is unjust.

A U.S. judge has authorized the deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate, who was detained last month due to his involvement in pro-Palestinian protests. Although Mr. Khalil is a permanent legal resident and has not faced criminal charges, the government asserts that his presence contradicts American foreign policy interests, citing a Cold War-era immigration law.

The immigration court’s decision does not necessitate Mr. Khalil’s immediate removal, as his attorneys have until April 23 to contest the order. Mr. Khalil has been held at a Louisiana detention center since March 8, following immigration officers’ notifications regarding his deportation linked to his anti-war demonstrations.

A 1952 law allows for deportation if an individual’s presence may result in negative consequences for U.S. foreign policy, and the judge deemed the government’s assertions about Mr. Khalil to be “facially reasonable.” After the judge’s ruling, Mr. Khalil stated that the principles of due process and fairness were absent throughout the proceedings.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) criticized the decision, describing it as predetermined and highlighting that the government’s evidence lacked substance, merely encompassing a letter from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, which acknowledged Mr. Khalil had not committed any crime.

The U.S. government has stated that the aim of deportation efforts is to protect Jewish students from potential harassment, countering that Mr. Khalil’s actions, though lawful, pose risks. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem lauded the ruling, asserting that advocating violence and harassment should result in the denial of residency privileges.

Mr. Khalil’s legal representatives maintained that accusations of antisemitism remain unfounded, with one attorney expressing determination to defend his client’s right to protest. Mr. Khalil has initiated a federal court lawsuit in New Jersey, arguing that his arrest was unconstitutional and seeking to prevent his deportation based on the lawsuit’s outcome.

Further complicating matters, the Trump administration has accused Mr. Khalil of immigration fraud related to undisclosed employment at the British embassy and the United Nations, although no new evidence has been introduced. The administration reaffirmed its commitment to immigration law enforcement, emphasizing the removal of individuals posing serious foreign policy threats to the United States.

The ruling allowing Mahmoud Khalil’s deportation epitomizes the intersection of immigration law and political expression, highlighting allegations of governmental overreach in the name of national security. Mr. Khalil’s legal team plans to appeal the decision and challenge his arrest in court, underscoring the contentious debate surrounding free speech and immigration policies under the Trump administration. As this case unfolds, it raises critical questions regarding the balance between national interests and individual rights.

Original Source: www.bbc.com

Related posts:

Federal Judge Blocks Deportation of Columbia Graduate Activist Mahmoud Khalil Deportation of Columbia Student Mahmoud Khalil Permitted by Court Court Rulings Enable Deportation of Columbia Grad Student and Other Immigration Challenges Columbia Student Files Lawsuit to Halt Deportation Over Protest Activities