Activist Mahmoud Khalil speaks out after release from ICE custody

NEWARK, NJ − Mahmoud Khalil emerged though the airport gate, fist raised and smiling to a cheering crowd, as he pushed his newborn baby's stroller with his arm around his wife.
Arriving at Newark International Airport the afternoon of June 21, a day after a federal judge ordered his release from immigration detention, the 30-year-old Columbia University graduate and Palestinian activist vowed to keep up his advocacy. Standing with his family and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-New York, he declared he wouldn't be deterred.
'Your words of support, your messages, have kept me going,' Khalil said in brief remarks. 'Still, the fight is far from over.'
He planned to continue speaking out against what he called a genocide in Gaza, and American support, including from Columbia, for Israel's siege of the Palestinian territory after the 2023 Hamas-led attacks in southern Israel. Israel has denied this accusation, though some human rights observers have reached this conclusion.
At the airport, Khalil approached the crowd to take a Palestinian flag from a friend, then draped it over the stroller of his son Deen, who was born 2 months ago, while Khalil was detained in Jena, Louisiana.
Asked if he had a message for the Trump administration, Khalil said, 'My existence is the message. Palestinian existence is a message.'
A day earlier, a federal district judge in New Jersey ordered Khalil's release after over three months in U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody following his advocacy at the Ivy League campus. The order marked a blow to the Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian student protests.
Ocasio-Cortez said Khalil's detention by the Trump administration was solely political.
"It is an affront to every American," she said. "We will continue to resist the politicization and the continued political persecution that ICE is engaged in. We welcome Mahmoud home."
Why was Khalil in ICE detention?
Khalil, a lawful permanent resident born in a Syrian refugee camp, was a student negotiator and spokesperson for pro-Palestinian demonstrators in spring 2024.
Students called on Columbia to divest from its investments in Israel that helped propel war efforts. Israel's siege of Gaza has killed 55,700 Palestinian people, mostly women and children, according to Gaza's health ministry. The mounting death toll came after Hamas-led attacks in Israel that killed 1,200 people and took 251 others hostage, Israeli tallies show.
Critics, including university administrators, accused the protesters of creating an unwelcoming environment for Jewish students. Organizers have denied accusations of antisemitism, and Khalil spoke out against antisemitism on CNN.
Columbia's encampment demonstrations triggered similar protests on college campuses across the country.
On March 8, federal agents detained Khalil, without a warrant, at his university-owned apartment building lobby in Manhattan. His wife Noor Abdalla, who is born in the United States and was 8 months' pregnant then, was by his side as they returned from dinner with friends.
In recorded cell phone video, Abdalla repeatedly asked agents why he was being taken and what agency they represented. They gave her no responses before taking Khalil, who appeared calm in footage.
His detention triggered waves of protests in New York City calling for his release.
Eventually, Khalil arrived to a Louisiana ICE detention center, where he'd stay for over 3 months. During that time, his son was born and other international students were detained in the Trump administration's sweeping crackdown on immigration.
Khalil's case was the first of several high-profile incidents in which pro-Palestinian student activists were detained by immigration authorities and targeted for deportation. Secretary of State Marco Rubio alleged Khalil participated in "antisemitic protests and disruptive activities" that "undermine U.S. efforts to combat anti-Semitism."
Rubio cited an obscure provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 to revoke Khalil's green card on the basis that he threatened American foreign policy interests.
What did the judge rule in Khalil's case?
Federal district Judge Michael Farbiarz of New Jersey ruled June 11 that Rubio had no authority to detain or deport Khalil on foreign policy grounds. Farbiarz said the government's other argument, that Khalil 'fraudulently or willfully' misrepresented material facts on his application for permanent residency, could still be used to detain him.
On June 20, Farbiarz called Khalil's months-long detention in a Louisiana detention center potentially punitive. "Extraordinary circumstances" warranted Khalil's release, Farbiarz said.
Among those were findings that Khalil − who has no criminal record nor has been charged with any crimes − didn't pose a flight risk or a danger to others in the community. Farbiarz, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, also raised concerns about the chilling effect his detention had on free speech, and the ability of an immigration judge to take on such issues.
Justice Department lawyers didn't object to evidence presented. They also didn't present proof alleging Khalil committed violence, property destruction or incitement to violence, Farbiarz added.
After the ruling, the Trump administration disputed Farbiarz's order, arguing he had no authority in immigration removal proceedings.
Meanwhile, administration officials said Khalil was twice removable on foreign policy grounds − namely over accusations of antisemitism and support for the Hamas militant group, and that he misrepresented information to obtain legal status. While Farbiarz has ruled out the foreign policy argument, the court is considering information he submitted to immigration officials.
Khalil's lawyers have called the administration's allegations "meritless."
Khalil has a pending lawsuit in New Jersey federal court against the Trump administration. Khalil's lawyers say the Trump administration violated his constitutional rights around free speech and due process.
A day after his arrival to Newark, demonstrators planned to rally in New York City in support of Khalil. Columbia didn't respond to an email request for comment.
Smiling alongside his wife and son, who he'd only seen once during his detention, he looked at the crowd and vowed to continue demonstrating.
"This is why I will continue to protest with every one of you," Khalil said. "Not (even) if they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine."
Contributing: Michael Karas, The Bergen Record; Michael Loria, USA TODAY.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

CNBC

23 minutes ago

• CNBC

Some lawmakers in both parties question the legality of Trump's Iran strikes

WASHINGTON — Several members of Congress in both parties Saturday questioned the legality of President Donald Trump's move to launch military strikes on Iran. While Republican leaders and many rank-and-file members stood by Trump's decision to bomb Iran's major nuclear enrichment facilities, at least two GOP lawmakers joined Democrats across the party spectrum in suggesting it was unconstitutional for him to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. "While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional," Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, who usually aligns with Trump, said on X. "I look forward to his remarks tonight." Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said in response to Trump's social media post announcing the strikes: "This is not Constitutional." Massie introduced a bipartisan resolution this week seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran "unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran" passed by Congress. In brief remarks from the White House on Saturday night, Trump defended the strikes but did not mention the basis of his legal authority to launch them without Congress' having given him that power. Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., reacted in real time during a speech in Tulsa, Oklahoma, slamming Trump's actions as "grossly unconstitutional." "The only entity that can take this country to war is the U.S. Congress. The president does not have the right," Sanders told the crowd, which broke out in "no more war!" chants. Some Democrats called it an impeachable offense for the president to bomb Iran without approval from Congress. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said Trump's move is "absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." "The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers," she said on X. "He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations." Rep. Sean Casten, D-Ill., said on social media: "This is not about the merits of Iran's nuclear program. No president has the authority to bomb another country that does not pose an imminent threat to the US without the approval of Congress. This is an unambiguous impeachable offense." Casten called on House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to "grow a spine" and protect the war powers reserved for Congress. Johnson said Trump respects the Constitution as he sought to lay the groundwork to defend his decision to act unilaterally. "The President fully respects the Article I power of Congress, and tonight's necessary, limited, and targeted strike follows the history and tradition of similar military actions under presidents of both parties," he said in a statement. Johnson's remarks, along with support for Trump's move offered by Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., indicate that Trump may have sufficient political cover to avoid blowback from the Republican-controlled Congress. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Trump "failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East." But he stopped short of labeling the military action illegal or unconstitutional. House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, D-Mass., was more direct on the legal question. "The power to declare war resides solely with Congress. Donald Trump's unilateral decision to attack Iran is unauthorized and unconstitutional," said Clark, the No. 2 Democrat. "In doing so, the President has exposed our military and diplomatic personnel in the region to the risk of further escalation." Appearing Saturday night on MSNBC, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who co-authored the resolution with Massie, wondered whether the anti-war voters who support Trump would back his move. "This is the first true crack in the MAGA base," he said, noting that Trump's rise in the 2016 primaries was aided by his move to slam President George W. Bush for the Iraq war.

Boston Globe

27 minutes ago

• Boston Globe

Senators Markey and Warren decry Trump's Iran strikes as unconstitutional

'Only Congress can declare war — and the Senate must vote immediately to prevent another endless war,' Warren said. Fellow Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey agreed, calling the strike 'illegal' for having lacked congressional approval. He said in a statement that Saturday's attack may set back Iran's nuclear ambitions, but added that not only can the country 'rebuild its program,' it 'will now be highly motivated to do so.' 'A diplomatic solution remains the best way to permanently and verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon,' Markey said. Chants of 'No More War' broke out at a Bernie Sanders rally in Tulsa, Okla., after the Vermont Senator read Trump's 'alarming' social media post announcing the strikes. 'The American people do not want more war, more death,' he said. Advertisement Massachusetts Peace Action, a Cambridge-based advocacy group, called for state leaders to speak out. The organization specifically called on Congressional leaders to pass the war power resolutions filed by Senator Tim Kaine and Representative Thomas Massie to prevent further US military action. 'We call on Massachusetts political leaders to speak out strongly against President Trump's lawless military adventure,' the organization wrote on Saturday night, shortly after the US attack on Iran. Brian Garvey, the organization's executive director, said an 'emergency event' was being planned outside Park Street Station at 1 p.m. Sunday, in protest of the strikes. Advertisement 'This direct attack by the United States on Iran a dramatic escalation by President Trump,' Garvey said in a phone call Saturday night. 'It's incredibly dangerous, it's unnecessary, and frankly, it's illegal.' Garvey said the founding fathers were explicit in giving Congress the power to declare war, adding that this is 'not how the government is supposed to work.' 'It is perhaps especially terrible because this is a president who ran saying he was going to seek peace,' he said. 'Back in 2016, he said the Iraq War was a big fat mistake. I fear that what he is leading us into could be even worse than that debacle and quagmire.' Garvey said he was 'fearful' for the US service members stationed in the Middle East, and 'outraged' that the strikes threatened their safety. Camilo Fonseca can be reached at

Yahoo

32 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Trump faces backlash from Maga base after strikes on Iran

President Donald Trump faced a fierce backlash from parts of his Maga movement over his decision to launch strikes against Iran, with Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data