Judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can remain in custody amid green card dispute
On Friday, Judge Michael Farbiarz of Newark, New Jersey, ruled that Khalil's legal team had not adequately shown why his detention on the charge would be unlawful.
It was a major setback for Khalil, who had been a negotiator for the student protesters at Columbia University demonstrating against Israel's war on Gaza. He was the first high-profile protester to be arrested under Trump's campaign to expel foreign students who participated in pro-Palestinian advocacy.
Just this week, Farbiarz appeared poised to order Khalil's release, on the basis that his detention under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was unconstitutional.
That law stipulates that the secretary of state – in this case, Marco Rubio – has the power to remove foreign nationals who have 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States'. But Farbiarz ruled that Rubio's use of the law violated Khalil's freedom of speech.
Still, the Trump administration filed additional court papers saying it had another reason for wanting to deport Khalil.
It alleged that Khalil, a permanent US resident, had omitted information from his green-card application that would have otherwise disqualified him from gaining residency.
The Trump administration has long accused Khalil of supporting terrorism through his protest-related activities, something the former graduate student has vehemently denied.
In the case of his green-card application, it argues that Khalil failed to disclose his work with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), a humanitarian organisation. Politicians in Israel and the US have accused UNRWA of ties to the armed group Hamas, an allegation reportedly made without evidence.
Khalil, however, has denied he was ever an 'officer' in UNRWA, as alleged. Instead, his legal team points out that he completed a United Nations internship through Columbia University.
The Trump administration also argues that Khalil did not accurately identify the length of his employment with the Syria Office of the British Embassy in Beirut. Khalil and his legal team, meanwhile, say he accurately identified his departure date from the job as December 2022.
Judge Farbiarz had set Friday morning as a deadline for the Trump administration to appeal Khalil's release on bail. But that deadline was extended to give the government more time to challenge Khalil's release.
Ultimately, Farbiarz allowed the Trump administration to continue its detention of Khalil. He advised Khalil's lawyers to seek release on bail from the immigration court where his deportation trial is being held in Louisiana.
Farbiarz had been weighing a separate habeas corpus petition from the Khalil team that called into question the constitutionality of his continued detention.
Marc Van Der Hout, a lawyer for Khalil, told the Reuters news agency that immigration fraud charges are exceedingly rare, and the Trump administration's use of such charges was simply a political manoeuvre to keep Khalil in lock-up.
'Detaining someone on a charge like this is highly unusual and frankly outrageous,' said Van Der Hout. 'There continues to be no constitutional basis for his detention.'
Another lawyer representing Khalil, Amy Greer, described the new allegations against his green-card application as part of the government's 'cruel, transparent delay tactics'. She noted that Khalil, a new father whose child was born in April, would miss his first Father's Day, which falls this Sunday in the US.
'Instead of celebrating together, he is languishing in ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] detention as punishment for his advocacy on behalf of his fellow Palestinians,' Greer said in a statement.
'It is unjust, it is shocking, and it is disgraceful.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
‘My duty': Columbia protester Mahmoud Khalil meets lawmakers at US Capitol
Washington, DC – Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University protest leader targeted for deportation by President Donald Trump, has met with lawmakers in Washington, DC. The visit on Tuesday comes just more than a month after the 30-year-old, a legal permanent resident of the United States, was released from immigration custody in Louisiana. 'I'm here in Washington, DC, today to meet with lawmakers, with members of Congress, to demand the end of the US-funded genocide in Gaza, and also to demand accountability from Columbia University, from the Trump administration for their retaliation against my speech,' said Khalil in a video interview with the news agency Reuters. 'To be honest, I feel that this is my duty to continue advocating for Palestinians. This is what the Trump administration tried to do. They tried to silence me. But I'm here to say that we will continue to resist. We are not backing down.' Khalil continues to face deportation under the Trump administration, which has relied on an obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 in its attempts to expel international students involved in pro-Palestinian advocacy. Under the law, the secretary of state can expel a foreign national if their presence in the country is deemed to have 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States', although the standard for making that determination remains unclear. I met with Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian student at Columbia University, who was imprisoned for 104 days by the Trump administration for opposing Netanyahu's illegal & horrific war in Gaza. Outrageous. We must not allow Trump to destroy the First Amendment & freedom to dissent. — Sen. Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) July 22, 2025 US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and immigration officials have repeatedly portrayed Khalil's advocacy as anti-Jewish and supportive of Hamas, but they have failed to provide evidence backing those claims. Lawyers for Khalil and three other students targeted for deportation by the Trump administration — Mohsen Mahdawi, Rumeysa Ozturk and Badar Khan Suri — have argued that their arrests trample on the constitutionally protected freedom of speech. Several district judges have sided with that position in ordering the students' release from custody as their cases proceed in immigration court. Earlier this month, Khalil, who missed the birth of his son while detained, filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration alleging malicious prosecution, as well as false arrest and imprisonment. He is seeking $20m in damages or an apology from the government. US Senator Bernie Sanders was among the lawmakers who met with Khalil on Tuesday. 'We must not allow Trump to destroy the First Amendment & freedom to dissent,' Sanders said in a post on the social media platform X, accompanied by a photo with Khalil. Mahmoud Khalil is a kind, gentle soul who cares deeply about others' humanity, and his abduction, detention, and ongoing persecution by the Trump Admin is egregious. I am deeply relieved that he has been reunited with his wife and his infant son. Our meeting today was fortifying… — Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley (@RepPressley) July 22, 2025 Khalil also met with Congress members Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Jim McGovern, Troy Carter and Summer Lee. 'Mahmoud Khalil is a kind, gentle soul who cares deeply about others' humanity, and his abduction, detention, and ongoing persecution by the Trump Admin is egregious,' Pressley wrote in a post on X. 'Our meeting today was fortifying and productive.' In its own social media message on Tuesday, the Department of Homeland Security once again called Khalil a 'terrorist sympathiser', accusing him of anti-Jewish 'hateful behavior and rhetoric'. However, ahead of his release in June, federal Judge Michael Farbiarz said he had given the administration lawyers ample time to support the public statements made against Khalil. He said they failed to do so. 'The petitioner's career and reputation are being damaged and his speech is being chilled,' Farbiarz wrote at the time. 'This adds up to irreparable harm.'
Al Jazeera
3 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Judges reject Trump lawyer Alina Habba's bid to serve as federal prosecutor
The Trump administration quickly acted to remove Habba's replacement following a decision not to extend her term. A panel of federal judges have declined to extend Alina Habba's term as a United States attorney for the district of New Jersey beyond the interim period of 120 days. Tuesday's court order, signed by the chief judge for the District of New Jersey, Renee Marie Bumb, brings Habba's brief tenure to an end for now. The judges instead elevated Desiree Grace, Habba's deputy at the US Attorney's Office in New Jersey, to serve as the bureau's top federal prosecutor. But the administration of President Donald Trump quickly denounced the judges' decision as political activism and fired Grace from the role before she could even take up the post. '[Alina Habba] has been doing a great job in making NJ safe again. Nonetheless, politically minded judges refused to allow her to continue in her position, replacing Alina with the First Assistant,' Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on social media. 'Accordingly, the First Assistant United States Attorney in New Jersey has just been removed. This Department of Justice does not tolerate rogue judges.' Habba's time as interim US attorney has sparked controversy as yet another example of Trump picking close personal contacts to serve in government roles. Habba herself has also been accused of carrying out politically motivated prosecutions while acting as the US lawyer. During her four-month tenure, she pursued cases against several Democratic lawmakers, including Newark Mayor Ras Baraka and US Representative LaMonica McIver. Both prosecutions stemmed from an effort by lawmakers to visit and inspect an immigrant detention facility in New Jersey. Trump has made mass deportation a central pillar of his second term, and that, in turn, has stirred fears about the safety and rights of those held in the detention facilities. Advertisement Controversial cases In the case of Baraka and McIver, the incident in question took place on May 9 at the Delaney Hall detention centre outside of Newark. Baraka, at the time a gubernatorial candidate for the Democratic Party, had repeatedly protested the newly opened facility for allegedly lacking the proper local permits. According to Baraka's defence team, he was invited inside the Delaney Hall gate along with members of the US Congress, who have a right to inspect federal facilities as part of their oversight duties. But he was asked to leave, and once he was outside the gate, he was handcuffed and led away. Habba later announced he had been charged with trespassing. Within 10 days, however, Habba walked back those charges 'after extensive consideration'. In a court hearing to dismiss the case, US Magistrate Judge Andre Espinosa chided a representative from Habba's office for making a 'worrisome misstep'. Espinosa told prosecutors that arresting a public figure should not be used as an 'investigative tool' and warned that criminal charges carry 'significant reputational and personal consequences'. Still, at the same time as she dropped the case against Baraka, Habba launched a case against Representative McIver, who had sought to defend the Newark mayor as he was being arrested. Habba sued McIver for physical assault after she allegedly pushed into a federal agent in the tightly packed crowd outside Delaney Hall. McIver has denied the charge and accused Habba of attempting to 'intimidate' her. Baraka, meanwhile, sued Habba over 'malicious prosecution'. Habba has also launched investigations into Democratic Governor Phil Murphy and Attorney General Matt Platkin over resistance to working more closely with the Trump administration on immigration enforcement. Ties to Trump Before joining the Trump administration as an interim US attorney, Habba served as the president's personal lawyer. She represented him in several civil cases before he returned to the White House in January. In one case, Habba represented Trump in a defamation suit brought by Summer Zervos, a former contestant on his reality television show The Apprentice. After Habba threatened a countersuit, Zervos dropped her defamation complaint. But she also was part of two high-profile cases that Trump lost: a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James and a defamation suit brought by writer E Jean Carroll. Trump has appealed both. In March, shortly after taking office for a second term, Trump appointed Habba to serve in the Department of Justice as a US attorney, the chief law enforcement officer in a given district. Advertisement But her position was on an interim basis, capped at 120 days. Continuing in the position beyond the interim period required the approval of a judicial panel. Still, Trump has signalled that he had hopes to keep Habba in her position. Earlier this month, he submitted a formal nomination to the US Senate for Habba to remain a US attorney. But that nomination faces opposition from New Jersey Senators Cory Booker and Andy Kim, who question whether Habba is qualified. Habba had not worked as a prosecutor until Trump appointed her to the role, and the Senate has yet to act on her nomination. Several of Trump's other nominees to the Department of Justice have faced similar pushback. Last week, a US District Court for the Northern District of New York declined to keep interim US attorney John Sarcone in place after his 120-day term neared its end. Nevertheless, members of the Trump administration were defiant in the face of the setbacks. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, another former personal lawyer to the president, accused the judges in New Jersey of having 'forced out' Habba on political grounds. 'The district judges in NJ just proved this was never about law—it was about politics,' Blanche wrote on social media. 'This backroom vote will not override the authority of the Chief Executive.'
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Trump dumps a pile of MLK files. Why not the Epstein files?
Nearly six decades after the assassination of United States civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr (MLK) in 1968, the White House has released more than 230,000 pages of once-classified files relating to his murder. After becoming president in January, Donald Trump signed an executive order declassifying documents related to the assassinations of King, former President John F Kennedy and former Senator Robert F Kennedy. The MLK files largely reinforce the longstanding official conclusion that James Earl Ray, the convicted assassin, acted alone with no conclusive evidence of a broader conspiracy. The files released on Monday add to the well-documented record of FBI surveillance and harassment of King, including efforts to discredit and intimidate him in the years leading up to his assassination. So what do the MLK files offer? What was the FBI operation against him? And why has Trump released them now? What are the MLK files? The MLK files are the trove of documents related to both the FBI's surveillance of King throughout the 1950s and 1960s and the investigation into his assassination in 1968. The records were put under a court-imposed seal in 1977 after the FBI compiled them and turned them over to the National Archives and Records Administration. The files include internal memos, wiretap transcripts, informant reports and correspondence from then-FBI Director J Edgar Hoover and senior officials, reflecting how the FBI viewed King as a political threat due to his civil rights activism. Advertisement A major focus is the FBI's covert campaign to discredit and intimidate King, which included bugging his hotel rooms, infiltrating his inner circle and even sending him an anonymous letter urging him to commit suicide in 1964. The FBI also falsely labelled King as a communist sympathiser based on his ties to former Communist Party member Stanley Levison, using this claim to justify illegal surveillance and attempts to destroy his reputation. These operations were part of the FBI's wider COINTELPRO programme, which targeted activists and dissenters across the country. Did the files reveal anything new? The newly released MLK files do not reveal any dramatic new evidence about his assassination or secret plots. The files largely reinforce what was already known: Ray was convicted as the lone shooter, and the FBI engaged in an extensive surveillance campaign. The communications also suggest the FBI considered multiple suspects beyond Ray but dropped those leads. Ray confessed to killing King in 1969 but later recanted and claimed he was framed. Before being arrested, Ray was on the run for nearly two months. He fled to Canada, Portugal and the United Kingdom before being extradited to the US, where he was convicted and sentenced to 99 years in prison. He died in April 1998 from complications related to kidney and liver disease. The documents reaffirm that the FBI, under the direction of Hoover, viewed King as a subversive figure and engaged in extensive surveillance and disinformation campaigns against him. These tactics, which included wiretaps and anonymous threats, have been public knowledge for decades, particularly after the findings of the US Senate's Church Committee in the 1970s. The new files appear to confirm this history while adding more granular details. They provide additional internal records and memos that reinforce previous accounts of the bureau's efforts to discredit King and monitor his activities. Notably, the release does not contain new evidence implicating anyone beyond Ray in King's assassination. But King scholars would like to see the information the FBI was discussing and circulating as part of its investigation, Ryan Jones, director of history, interpretation and curatorial services at the National Civil Rights Museum in Memphis, Tennessee told The Associated Press news agency. 'That's critical given the fact the American public, at that time, was unaware that the FBI that is involved in the investigation was leading a smear campaign to discredit the same man while he was alive,' Jones was quoted as saying. 'They were the same bureau who was receiving notices of assassination attempts against King and ignored them.' What is the civil rights movement? The civil rights movement was a decades-long struggle, primarily in the US during the 1950s and 1960s, aimed at ending racial segregation and discrimination against African Americans. Advertisement Rooted in centuries of resistance to slavery and racial injustice, the movement gained momentum after World War II as Black Americans demanded equal treatment under the law and full access to political, social and economic rights guaranteed by the US Constitution. Led by figures such as Malcolm X, Rosa Parks, King and countless grassroots activists, the movement employed strategies ranging from peaceful protests and legal challenges to civil disobedience and mass mobilisation. Landmark events like the Montgomery bus boycott in Alabama; the March on Washington, where King delivered his 'I Have a Dream' speech; and the Selma-to-Montgomery marches, also in Alabama, pressured lawmakers and reshaped public opinion. These efforts led to major legislative victories, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. What was this FBI operation? The FBI's operation against King was primarily conducted under the Counterintelligence Program, known as COINTELPRO, a covert initiative launched by the FBI under Hoover. Initiated in 1956, COINTELPRO targeted various organisations, but its focus on King and the broader civil rights movement intensified in the early 1960s, particularly as King's prominence grew. The FBI labelled King a national security threat, suspecting communist influence within the civil rights movement although no such ties were ever substantiated. Declassified documents outline a systematic campaign to monitor King's activities, undermine his leadership and tarnish his public image through surveillance and psychological tactics. Wiretaps were placed on King's home and office phones, and hidden microphones were installed in hotel rooms where he stayed. These efforts, authorised by Attorney General Robert F Kennedy in 1963, were often abused to collect salacious details about King's private life, particularly extramarital affairs. In 1964, the FBI sent an anonymous letter to King accompanied by an audiotape it pulled from bugged hotel rooms that allegedly was evidence of his affairs and urged him to commit suicide to avoid public disgrace. The FBI's operation against King, which continued until his assassination in 1968, reflected Hoover's animosity and the agency's broader paranoia about civil rights activism disrupting the status quo. 'He was relentlessly targeted by an invasive, predatory, and deeply disturbing disinformation and surveillance campaign,' a King family statement said. Why did Trump release them now? The Trump administration released the MLK files despite opposition from his family and the political group he once led. In a statement, Attorney General Pamela Bondi said: 'The American people deserve answers decades after the horrific assassination of one of our nation's great leaders.' Trump's order for the files to be released said it was in the 'national interest' to release the records. 'Their families and the American people deserve transparency and truth,' it said. Advertisement Bondi hosted Alveda King, a conservative commentator and MLK's niece, at the Department of Justice to commemorate the release of the files. Alveda said she was grateful to Trump 'for delivering on their pledge of transparency in the release of these documents on the assassination' of King. The King family said in its statement that it had hoped to get an opportunity to review the files as a family before their public release. In a statement released on Monday, King's children called their father's case a 'captivating public curiosity for decades' but emphasised that 'these files must be viewed within their full historical context.' 'We ask those who engage with the release of these files to do so with empathy, restraint, and respect for our family's continuing grief,' the statement said. Has Trump released other files? Before releasing the MLK files, Trump declassified thousands of documents related to the assassinations of former President Kennedy (JFK) and his younger brother, Robert F Kennedy, calling it a push for transparency. In March, the National Archives released tens of thousands of pages concerning JFK's 1963 assassination, including previously redacted FBI and CIA records. These documents offered further detail on the intelligence tracking of JFK assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and US surveillance efforts during the Cold War. After that, from April to June, the Trump administration released more than 70,000 pages related to the 1968 assassination of Senator Kennedy. These records included FBI field reports, informant files and internal memos. While many hailed this latest release, Trump also faced criticism from other leaders who called it a political distraction at a time when pressure has been mounting over the president's handling of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein files. The Epstein files detail the life and connections of the disgraced financier with deep ties to elite political, business and cultural circles. Calls for transparency have intensified after renewed demands from civil society, victims advocates and bipartisan lawmakers who argued that shielding the full extent of Epstein's connections undermines justice and accountability.
