Immigration Judge Rules Columbia University Activist Mahmoud Khalil Eligible for Deportation, Sparking Outcry Over Free Speech and Due Process
In a decision that has been swiftly denounced as unconstitutional and politically motivated, a U.S. immigration judge in Louisiana ruled on Thursday that Columbia University student and activist Mahmoud Khalil is eligible for deportation—despite no criminal charges, no immigration violations, and no credible evidence presented by the government beyond a letter from Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Khalil, a legal permanent resident and outspoken advocate for Palestinian human rights, was arrested on March 8 in what his attorneys and civil liberties groups have described as an act of political retaliation by the Trump administration. Shortly after his arrest, he was transferred 1,400 miles away from New York to a remote Louisiana detention facility, where his removal case was fast-tracked and concluded with a ruling that many are calling a show trial.
The decision came less than 48 hours after the government submitted its evidence—a memo from Rubio alleging that Khalil posed “adverse foreign policy consequences” for the United States. The letter admitted Khalil had committed no crimes, but argued that his public speech, protests, and organizing around Palestinian rights at Columbia rendered him deportable under national security pretexts.
“This ruling rubber-stamped a shameful determination by Secretary Rubio that one’s beliefs can lead to deportation.” – Diala Shamas, Center for Constitutional Rights
Despite the judge’s decision, Khalil is not yet scheduled for removal. His legal team is pursuing a parallel habeas corpus case in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, where Judge Michael E. Farbiarz has ordered immediate updates following the immigration ruling. Khalil’s attorneys are seeking bail and a preliminary injunction that would release him from custody and block the Trump administration’s sweeping policy targeting pro-Palestinian student activists.
“This is one of the most frivolous, dangerous, and unconstitutional legal decisions I have seen in modern history,” said Alec Karakatsanis, civil rights attorney and founder of Civil Rights Corps. “Even the attempt to procure this decision has done enormous damage to any project of civilized, democratic society.”
Scott Hechinger, founder of Zealous and a criminal justice reform advocate, echoed the critique: “It’s critical to understand two things: First, immigration judges are not independent—they are political appointees of the executive. Second, Trump purged immigration judges who didn’t align with him at the outset of his administration. These rulings are political tools.”
A slew of civil rights organizations—led by the ACLU, CAIR, and the Center for Constitutional Rights—issued urgent statements warning that the ruling represents an open attack on the First Amendment and sets a dangerous precedent for dissent in the United States.
“The government presented no evidence to substantiate its charges because no evidence exists,” said Amol Sinha, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Jersey. “This is a dangerous departure from the fundamental freedoms at the bedrock of our nation.”
“This is one of the most frivolous, dangerous, and unconstitutional legal decisions I have seen in modern history.” – Alec Karakatsanis, civil rights attorney
At the conclusion of the immigration hearing, Mahmoud Khalil stood and addressed the judge: “There’s nothing that’s more important to this court than due process rights and fundamental fairness. Clearly what we witnessed today, neither of these principles were present… This is exactly why the Trump administration has sent me to this court—1,000 miles away from my family.”
According to court observers and his legal team, the decision appeared pre-written, and the judge read it aloud immediately after closing arguments—a move that reinforced concerns that the outcome was politically predetermined.
“This ruling rubber-stamped a shameful determination by Secretary Rubio that one’s beliefs can lead to deportation,” said Diala Shamas of the Center for Constitutional Rights. “We should all be deeply concerned.”
The decision comes as part of a broader crackdown on student activists critical of the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza. Hundreds of international students have already had their visas revoked under what civil rights groups are calling a McCarthy-style campaign of repression.
“The Trump administration is using immigration law to punish dissent,” said Donna Lieberman, Executive Director of the NYCLU. “If Mahmoud can be deported for peaceful protest, so can anyone who speaks out on an issue the administration finds politically inconvenient.”
“The government presented no evidence to substantiate its charges because no evidence exists.” – Amol Sinha, Executive Director of the ACLU of New Jersey
Ramzi Kassem, co-director of CLEAR, said the government’s strategy was clear from the beginning: “Rip Mahmoud away from his pregnant wife, isolate him far from his legal counsel, and rush through a hearing in front of a judge who serves at the President’s pleasure. The outcome was engineered from day one.”
Khalil’s federal legal team—including attorneys from Dratel & Lewis, the ACLU, NYCLU, Van Der Hout LLP, the Center for Constitutional Rights, CLEAR, and Washington Square Legal Services—plans to pursue multiple avenues of relief.
“We will continue undeterred,” said Noor Zafar of the ACLU Immigrants’ Rights Project. “This administration may escalate its war on dissent, but we will defend the right to speak freely about Palestine or any other issue without fear of detention and deportation.”
Amy Greer of Dratel & Lewis added: “This egregious overreach will embolden the Trump administration to go after more vulnerable people. We’ve fought every day since Mahmoud was detained—and we’ll continue until he’s home.”
Khalil’s legal team has until April 23 to seek emergency relief to prevent his deportation. If the preliminary injunction is granted in federal court, it could halt the administration’s policy of detaining and deporting lawful permanent residents who engage in constitutionally protected speech.
CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad noted the stakes: “This ruling should alarm all Americans who cherish the Bill of Rights. The idea that a person can be deported for peaceful speech is fundamentally un-American. But we are confident federal courts will block this lawless attack on civil liberties.”
