Mahmoud Khalil finally allowed to hold one-month-old son for the first time

Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate and detained Palestinian activist, was finally allowed to hold his infant son for the first time on Thursday – one month after he was born – thanks to a federal judge who blocked the Trump administration's efforts to keep the father and infant separated by a Plexiglass barrier.
The visit came before a scheduled immigration hearing for Khalil, a legal permanent resident who has been detained in a Louisiana jail since 8 March.
The question of whether Khalil would be permitted to hold his newborn child, Deen, or forced to meet him through a barrier had sparked days of legal fighting, triggering claims by Khalil's attorneys that he is being subject to political retaliation by the government.
On Wednesday night, a federal judge in New Jersey, Michael Farbiarz, intervened, allowing the meeting to go forward on Thursday morning, according to Khalil's attorneys.
The judge's order came after federal officials said this week they would oppose his attorney's effort to secure what's known as a 'contact visit' among Khalil; his wife, Noor Abdalla; and their son.
Instead, they said Khalil could be allowed a 'non-contact' visit, meaning he would be separated from his wife and son by a plastic divider and not allowed to touch them.
'Granting Khalil this relief of family visitation would effectively grant him a privilege that no other detainee receives,' justice department officials wrote in a court filing on Wednesday. 'Allowing Dr Abdalla and a newborn to attend a legal meeting would turn a legal visitation into a family one.'
Brian Acuna, acting director of the Ice field office in New Orleans, said in an accompanying affidavit that it would be 'unsafe to allow Mr Khalil's wife and newborn child into a secured part of the facility'.
In their own legal filings, Khalil's attorneys described the government's refusal to grant the visit as 'further evidence of the retaliatory motive behind Mr Khalil's arrest and faraway detention', adding that his wife and son were 'the farthest thing from a security risk'.
They noted that Abdalla had traveled nearly 1,500 miles (2,400km) to the remote detention center in hopes of introducing their son to his father.
'This is not just heartless,' Abdalla said of the government's position. 'It is deliberate violence, the calculated cruelty of a government that tears families apart without remorse. And I cannot ignore the echoes of this pain in the stories of Palestinian families, torn apart by Israeli military prisons and bombs, denied dignity, denied life.'
Khalil was the first person to be arrested under Donald Trump's promised crackdown on protesters against the war in Gaza and is one of the few who have remained in custody as his case winds its way through both immigration and federal court.
Federal authorities have not accused Khalil of a crime, but they have sought to deport him on the basis that his prominent role in protests against Israel's war in Gaza may have undermined US foreign policy interests.
His request to attend his son's 21 April birth was denied last month by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
In a letter to his son published in the Guardian, Khalil wrote after the birth: 'My heart aches that I could not hold you in my arms and hear your first cry, that I could not unfurl your clenched fists or change your first diaper.
'My absence is not unique,' Khalil added. 'Like other Palestinian fathers, I was separated from you by racist regimes and distant prisons. In Palestine, this pain is part of daily life … The grief your mother and I feel is but one drop in a sea of sorrow that Palestinian families have drowned in for generations.'
Farbiarz is currently considering Khalil's petition for release as he appeals a Louisiana immigration judge's ruling that he can be deported from the country.
On Thursday, Khalil appeared before that immigration judge, Jamee Comans, as his attorneys presented testimony about the risks he would face if he were to be deported to Syria, where he grew up in a refugee camp, or Algeria, where he maintains citizenship through a distant relative.
His attorneys submitted testimony from Columbia University faculty and students attesting to Khalil's character.
In one declaration, Joseph Howley, a classics professor, said he had first introduced Khalil to a university administrator to serve as a spokesperson on behalf of campus protesters, describing him as an 'upstanding, principled and well-respected member of our community.
'I have never known Mahmoud to espouse any anti-Jewish sentiments or prejudices, and have heard him forcefully reject antisemitism on multiple occasions,' Howley wrote.
No ruling regarding the appeal was made on Thursday. Comans gave lawyers in the case until 5pm 2 June to submit written closing arguments.
Columbia's interim president, Claire Shipman, acknowledged Mahmoud's absence from Wednesday's commencement ceremony and said many students were 'mourning' that he could not be present. Her speech drew loud boos from some graduates, along with chants of 'free Mahmoud'.
Abdalla accepted a diploma for Khalil on his behalf at an alternative graduation ceremony on Sunday.
In the 75 days since his arrest, at least three other international college students have been released from detention after weeks of legal action by their attorneys. They include Rümeysa Öztürk, Mohsen Mahdawi and Badar Khan Suri.
All three have been targeted for deportation by the Trump administration, and have challenged the legality of their detentions with a string of motions and legal briefs in federal district courts. The judges in all of their cases agreed to release them while their immigration court cases played out.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

35 minutes ago

• Yahoo

Judge Destroys Trump's Case Against Kilmar Abrego Garcia

A judge in Tennessee eviscerated the government's case for keeping Kilmar Abrego Garcia detained ahead of his trial for criminal charges alleging that he transported undocumented immigrants around the country. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes in Nashville said Sunday that 'the government failed to prove' that Abrego Garcia had endangered any minor victim, a claim not included in the official charges but was used to justify his ongoing detention. In a 51-page ruling, Holmes explained that not only had the government's evidence included 'double hearsay,' but that some of it also defied logic. Holmes wrote that ICE HSI Special Agent Peter Joseph had presented 'hearsay statements of cooperating witnesses' to establish that Abrego Garcia had endangered minors, including one cooperator who was 'a two-time, previously-deported felon, and acknowledged ringleader of a human smuggling operation' who'd cut a deal for early release from the government. Testimony from a second cooperator was similarly unreliable because 'his requested release from jail and delay of another deportation depends on providing information the government finds useful.' The government had not been able to prove that Abrego Garcia transported immigrant minors, but both male cooperators had claimed that he had endangered his own children. 'Both male cooperators stated that, other than three or four trips total without his children, Abrego typically took his children with him during the alleged smuggling trips from Maryland to Houston and back, some 2,900 miles round-trip, as often as three or four times per week,' Holmes wrote. 'The sheer number of hours that would be required to maintain this schedule, which would consistently be more than 120 hours per week of driving time, approach physical impossibility. For that additional reason, the Court finds that the statements of the first and second male cooperators are not reliable to establish that this case 'involves a minor victim.'' 'There is no dispute the offenses of which Abrego is charged are not crimes against children and the involvement of a minor child is not an element of the charged offenses,' Holmes wrote, disputing the government's claim that Abrego Garcia's alleged criminal activity technically 'involves minor victims.' Holmes scheduled another hearing for Wednesday to discuss the conditions of Abrego Garcia's release, but the government is expected to detain him upon release. The government has already filed a motion to appeal Holmes's decision and asked her to stay her order, arguing without evidence that Abrego Garcia could be deported in the future.

Boston Globe

36 minutes ago

• Boston Globe

How the US bombarded Iranian nuclear sites without detection

Advertisement Taking off from the U.S. heartland, B-2 stealth bombers delivered a total of 420,000 pounds of explosives, aided by an armada of refueling tankers and fighter jets — some of which launched their own weapons. U.S. officials said Iran neither detected the inbound fusillade, nor mustered a shot at the stealthy American jets. The operation relied on a series of deceptive tactics and decoys to maintain the secrecy, U.S. officials said hours after the attack, which was preceded by nine days of Israeli attacks that debilitated Iran's military leadership and air defenses. A decoy plan Even before the planes took off, elements of misdirection were already in play. After setting parts of the plan in motion, Trump publicly announced Thursday that he'd make a decision within two weeks on whether to strike Iran — ostensibly to allow additional time for negotiations, but in actuality masking the impending attack. Advertisement One group of B-2 stealth bombers traveled west from Missouri on Saturday as decoys, drawing the attention of amateur plane spotters, government officials and some media as they headed toward a U.S. air base in the Pacific. At the same time, seven other B-2s carrying two 'bunker buster' bombs apiece flew eastward, keeping communications to a minimum so as not to draw any attention. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at Sunday's briefing that it was all 'part of a plan to maintain tactical surprise' and that only 'an extremely small number of planners and key leaders' knew about it in Washington and Florida, where U.S. Central Command is based. After 18 hours of furtive flying that required aerial refueling, the armed B-2 Spirit bombers, each with two crew members, arrived on time and without detection in the Eastern Mediterranean, from where they launched their attack runs. Before crossing into Iran, the B-2s were escorted by stealthy U.S. fighter jets and reconnaissance aircraft. A graphic released by the Pentagon showed the flight route as passing over Lebanon, Syria and Iraq. It was unclear whether those countries were notified of the U.S. overflight in advance. Most U.S. lawmakers were also kept in the dark, with some Republicans saying they were provided a brief heads-up by the White House before the strike. 'Our B-2s went in and out and back without the world knowing at all,' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told reporters Sunday. A multifaceted attack About an hour before the B-2s entered Iran, Caine said that a U.S. submarine in the region launched more than two dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles against key targets, including a site in Isfahan where uranium is prepared for enrichment. Advertisement As the U.S. bombers approached their targets, they watched out for Iranian fighter jets and surface-to-air missiles, but encountered none. At 6:40 p.m. in Washington and 2:10 a.m. in Tehran, the first B-2 bomber dropped its pair of GBU-57 massive ordnance penetrators on the deeply buried Fordo uranium enrichment plant. It was the first time these so-called 'bunker busters' had ever been used in combat. Each 30,000-pound bomb is designed to burrow into the ground before detonating a massive warhead. The Fordo site received the bulk of the bombardment, though a couple of the enormous bombs were also dropped on a uranium enrichment site at Natanz. The U.S. bombs fell for about half an hour, with cruise missiles fired from submarines being the last American weapons to hit their targets, which included a third nuclear site at Isfahan, Caine said. Both Iran and the U.N. nuclear watchdog said there were no immediate signs of radioactive contamination around the sites. A look at the numbers The mission included: — 75 precision-guided weapons: these included 14 GBU-57 'bunker buster' bombs deployed by the seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, and more than two-dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from a U.S. submarine. — 125 aircraft, including the B-2 bombers, fighter jets and refueling planes. A female pilot Hegseth said Sunday that 'our boys in those bombers are on their way home right now.' But a U.S. official said one woman was among those piloting the B-2 bombers. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about the mission publicly. Advertisement A bit of history Caine said the use of the bunker-buster bombs made the mission historic, as did other elements. 'This was the largest B-2 operational strike in U.S. history, and the second longest B-2 mission ever flown, exceeded only by those in the days following 9/11,' he told reporters Sunday. Lolita C. Baldor in Narragansett, Rhode Island and Nicholas Ingram in Knob Noster, Missouri, contributed reporting. Kinnard reported from Chapin, South Carolina.

The Hill

an hour ago

• The Hill

History shows prosecuting officials challenging ICE raids won't be easy

President Trump's promised retribution against what he has called the 'core of the Democrat Power Center' includes siccing thousands of ICE agents on 'blue cities.' The assault has already led to the prosecution of public officials who challenged his abusive immigration seizures. But the Trump administration will likely lose those cases, thanks to the strong American tradition of jury resistance, sometimes called nullification, dating to before the Civil War. In New Jersey, Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) was indicted for allegedly interfering with the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka during an immigration protest rally at an ICE detention center. If convicted of the two forcible felonies, McIver would face a maximum sentence of eight years. McIver denies the accusations, pointing out that she had a legal right to inspect the facility as a member of Congress. She has raised the Constitution's speech and debate clause as a defense. In Wisconsin, the Trump administration brought criminal charges against Milwaukee County Court Judge Hannah Dugan for allegedly preventing the arrest of a migrant in her courtroom. Dugan pleaded not guilty and moved to dismiss the case on the basis of judicial immunity. McIver's and Dugan's defenses are robust and may well prevail. But even if the prosecutors manage to overcome the immunity arguments, they will still have to face juries in Newark and Milwaukee, two of the heavily Democratic cities reviled by Trump. As detailed in my book, 'Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial,' American juries have historically refused to enforce unpopular laws against sympathetic defendants, in cases far more extreme than McIver's or Dugan's. In September 1851, shortly after the passage of the infamous Fugitive Slave Act, a band of slavehunters from Maryland, holding a federal warrant and under the leadership of a deputy U.S. marshal, attempted to apprehend four alleged runaways near the village of Christiana, Pennsylvania. When the posse's presence was discovered, the local Black community, along with some white allies, rallied to the defense of the fugitives and drove it away in a hail of rocks and bullets. One would-be kidnapper was killed in the melee, and the deputy marshal was humiliated. The fugitives escaped to Canada with the assistance of Frederick Douglass. The Millard Fillmore administration obtained indictments against 41 defendants — 36 Black and five white — accusing them of forming a 'traitorous combination' to 'prevent the execution' of the Fugitive Slave Act. The formal charge was treason, which carried the death penalty. The first defendant brought to trial — ironically, in Philadelphia's Constitution Hall — was a white miller named Castner Hanway. The prosecutors wrongly claimed that Hanway had been a mastermind of the rebellion, because they could not believe Black people capable of organizing a successful resistance against heavily armed whites. Hanway was represented by Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-Pa.), one of the great abolition advocates of his time and later author of the 13th Amendment. Stevens put on a defense that emphasized the frequent 'kidnapping and carrying away of colored persons' to nearby Maryland. As an explanation for the resistance, he noted the seizure of 'Black people … by force and violence and great injury and malice, without authority from any person on earth.' It took the jury only 15 minutes to acquit Hanway. Recognizing the futility of proceeding, the prosecution eventually dropped the charges against all defendants. Also in 1851, an alleged fugitive named Shadrach Minkins was arrested in Boston by agents operating under the Fugitive Slave Act. He was hustled into a federal courtroom where abolitionist lawyers volunteered to represent him. As the court convened the next day, about 20 Black men shoved their way through the doors and carried Minkins into the street. Onlookers cheered while 'two powerful fellows hurried him through the square,' later to be taken by wagon to Canada. Two of the most important leaders of Boston's free Black community were arrested for violating the Fugitive Slave Act: a prominent merchant named Lewis Hayden and attorney Robert Morris, one of the first Black lawyers in the U.S., as well as a white newspaper editor named Elizur Wright. All three defendants were represented by Richard Henry Dana, author of the memoir 'Two Years before the Mast,' and scion of one of Boston's oldest families. Despite substantial evidence of the defendants' participation in the rescue, there were no convictions, with two acquittals and a hung jury. As tensions increased between North and South, there were fizzled prosecutions in Syracuse, Milwaukee, again in Boston, and elsewhere. Even when prosecutions succeeded, sentencing judges could be unusually lenient. More important than any of the individual outcomes was the political movement built around the Fugitive Slave Act trials. Before the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, many northerners were content to condemn enslavement from a distance, expressing disapproval but taking no action to oppose it. Afterward, the repeated arrests of alleged runaways and the trials that followed, of both fugitives and rescuers, made it impossible to ignore the federal government's intrusive role in enforcing human bondage. The McIver and Dugan prosecutors will have to contend with potential jurors appalled by Trump's indiscriminate pursuit of migrants, just as jurors in antebellum Boston and Philadelphia were appalled by the kidnapping of fugitives and arrests of rescuers. Defense counsel will surely highlight the hypocrisy of prosecuting McIver and Dugan for minor incidents, versus Trump's mass pardons of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. In the 1850s, northern opposition to the spread of slavery, sharpened by confrontations with slave hunters and federal marshals, led to Abraham Lincoln's election in 1860. Will the prosecution of Democratic officeholders and the arrests of countless migrants by masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have the same impact on the mid-term elections of 2026? Steven Lubet is the Williams Memorial Professor Emeritus at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law. He is the author of 'Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial' and other books on abolitionist lawyers and political trials.