Columbia grad student’s detention will stretch on as lawyers spar over Trump’s plan to deport him

Columbia grad student’s detention will stretch on as lawyers spar over Trump’s plan to deport him
People gather outside of a New York court to protest the arrest and detention of Mahmoud Khalil at Foley Square on Mar. 12, 2025 in New York City. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 12 March 2025

Columbia grad student’s detention will stretch on as lawyers spar over Trump’s plan to deport him

Columbia grad student’s detention will stretch on as lawyers spar over Trump’s plan to deport him
  • After Khalil’s Manhattan arrest, Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered that the 30-year-old not be deported while the court considers a legal challenge brought by his lawyers
  • One of Khalil’s lawyers, Ramzi Kassem, told the judge that Khalil was “identified, targeted and detained” because of his advocacy for Palestinian rights and his protected speech

NEW YORK: Mahmoud Khalil will remain detained in Louisiana until at least next week following an initial court hearing in New York on Wednesday over the Trump administration’s plans to deport the Columbia University graduate student for his role in campus protests against Israel.
The brief hearing, which focused on thorny jurisdictional issues, drew hundreds of demonstrators to the federal courthouse in lower Manhattan to denounce the Saturday arrest of Khalil, a permanent US resident who is married to an American citizen. Khalil, 30, didn’t attend — after initially being held in New Jersey, he was moved to an immigration detention center in Louisiana.
After Khalil’s Manhattan arrest, Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered that the 30-year-old not be deported while the court considers a legal challenge brought by his lawyers, who want Khalil returned to New York and released under supervision.
During Wednesday’s hearing, attorney Brandon Waterman argued on behalf of the Justice Department that the venue for the deportation fight should be moved from New York City to Louisiana or New Jersey because those are the locations where Khalil has been held.
One of Khalil’s lawyers, Ramzi Kassem, told the judge that Khalil was “identified, targeted and detained” because of his advocacy for Palestinian rights and his protected speech. He said Khalil has no criminal convictions, but “for some reason, is being detained.”
Kassem also told Furman that Khalil’s legal team hasn’t been able to have a single attorney-client-protected phone call with him.
Furman ordered that the lawyers be allowed to speak with him by phone at least once on Wednesday and Thursday. Calling the legal issues “important and weighty,” the judge also directed the two sides to submit a joint letter on Friday describing when they propose to submit written arguments over the legal issues raised by Khalil’s detention.
Kassem said Khalil’s lawyers would update their lawsuit on Thursday.
Khalil’s arrest has sparked protests in New York and other US cities. Actor Susan Sarandon emerged from the courthouse and told reporters that “no matter where you stand on genocide, freedom of speech ... is a right that we all have.” She added: ”And this is a turning point in the history and the freedom of this country.”
Some of Khalil’s supporters, many of them wearing a keffiyeh and mask, attended the hearing. Hundreds more demonstrated outside the courthouse, beating drums, waving Palestinian flags and chanting for Khalil’s release. The raucous crowd grew quiet, though, to hear Kassem speak.
“As we tried to make clear in court today, what happened to Mahmoud Khalil is nothing short of extraordinary and shocking and outrageous,” Kassem told the crowd. “It should outrage anybody who believes that speech should be free in the United States of America.”
Kassem said the legal grounds cited by the government to detain Khalil were “vague” and “rarely used,” masking the true intent: “retaliation and punishment for the exercise of free speech.”
Columbia became the center of a US pro-Palestinian protest movement that swept across college campuses nationwide last year and led to more than 2,000 arrests.
Khalil, whose wife is pregnant with their first child, finished his requirements for a Columbia master’s degree in December. Born in Syria, he is a grandson of Palestinians who were forced to leave their homeland, his lawyers said in a legal filing.
President Donald Trump heralded Khalil’s arrest as the first “of many to come,” vowing on social media to deport students he described as engaging in “pro-terrorist, anti-Semitic, anti-American activity.”
During a stopover in Ireland while headed from to a meeting of the G7 foreign ministers in Canada, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that Khalil’s case is “not about free speech.”
“This is about people that don’t have a right to be in the United States to begin with. No one has a right to a student visa. No one has a right to a green card,” Rubio said.
Khalil, who acted as a spokesperson for Columbia protesters, hasn’t been charged with a crime. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that the administration moved to deport him under a section of the Immigration and Nationality Act that gives the secretary of state the power to deport a noncitizen on foreign policy grounds.
Civil rights groups and Khalil’s attorneys say the government is unconstitutionally using its immigration control powers to stop him from speaking out.
US Jewish groups and leaders and organizations have been divided in their response to Khalili’s detention.
Among those welcoming the move was the Anti-Defamation League, which said it hopes it serves as a “deterrent.”
“We appreciate the Trump Administration’s broad, bold set of efforts to counter campus antisemitism — and this action further illustrates that resolve by holding alleged perpetrators responsible for their actions,” the ADL said on social media.
Amy Spitalnick, CEO of Jewish Council for Public Affairs, decried Khalil’s detention.
The Trump administration “is exploiting real concerns about antisemitism to undercut democracy: from gutting education funding to deporting students to attacking diversity, equity, & inclusion,” she wrote on Bluesky. “As we’ve repeatedly said: this makes Jews — & so many others — less safe.”


Across Europe, nationalist parliament speakers spark controversy

Updated 17 sec ago

Across Europe, nationalist parliament speakers spark controversy

Across Europe, nationalist parliament speakers spark controversy
VIENNA: As far-right parties have topped polls across Europe in recent years, nationalist politicians have taken the helm of four parliaments, stirring controversy.
Czech lawmakers elected the country’s first-ever far-right parliament speaker on Wednesday, becoming the latest parliament in Europe to be headed by a nationalist and pro-Russian politician since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.
One day after Czech far-right leader Tomio Okamura — who has called for an end to aid for Ukraine — was elected parliament speaker, he ordered the removal of the Ukrainian flag from the building, where it had been hoisted in solidarity.
Austrian historians this week also urged the Alpine country’s first far-right parliamentary speaker to call off a planned event on November 11 that “honors a declared antisemite,” the late politician Franz Dinghofer, Austria’s vice chancellor in the 1920s and a Nazi party member during World War II.
In Italy, Austria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, nationalist politicians have won the parliamentary presidency, joining Hungary, where nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s party has held the post since 2010.
In all four countries, the change followed an agreement with other political parties, as the nationalists lacked an absolute majority.
And the elected parliament speakers were not from the same political party as the head of government, as is the case in Hungary.
According to Catherine Fieschi, a researcher at the Robert Schuman Center at the European University Institute of Florence, Orban “has paved the way” for the current trend.
Since Orban’s return to power in 2010, he “has shown that it is possible to remain in the European Union” without respecting its treaties, she said.
Moreover, the trend has accelerated since Donald Trump’s return to the White House, with the US president’s “character hardly acting as a repellent” in European countries marked by a different “political culture” and an “ambiguous” relationship with Russia, she added.
Due to some countries’ shared communist past and their geographical proximity to Moscow, they try to refrain from any “escalation” with Russia, Fieschi said.
These countries also benefit considerably from European funds, and fear they might have to share money from Brussels with countries such as Albania, Montenegro or even Ukraine that aim to join the EU, she added.

- ‘Gaining respectability’ -

For nationalist parties, which have seized on such concerns, taking the helm of parliament is a major step forward, experts told AFP.
In Slovakia, the Hlas party got the parliamentary presidency in March thanks to its support for nationalist premier Robert Fico’s party and the far-right SNS party since joining a coalition in 2023.
The Socialists and Democrats Group in the European parliament excluded Hlas from its parliamentary group, saying its positions on “Russia’s war in Ukraine, migration, the rule of law and the LGBTQ community have raised serious concerns and have no place in the progressive family.”
Austria’s far-right parliamentary speaker Walter Rosenkranz — who faces widespread criticism for being a member of a far-right student fraternity known for its strident pan-German nationalism — has not tried to build consensus beyond his own political camp since assuming office last year.
“For these parties, which have long been outside the system, taking control of presidencies allows them to counterbalance the executive branch, as governing parties have often sought coalitions due to their weakened position,” said Cyrille Bret, associate researcher at the Jacques Delors Institute.
This position is “particularly suited to protest parties in the process of gaining power,” he said.
“They can use their powers of oversight to criticize the government without assuming responsibility themselves, not to mention the budgetary gains.”
This also allows them to “raise their profile and gain respectability.”