US judge orders release of pro-Palestinian activist Khalil
By Jonathan Allen and Luc Cohen
NEW YORK (Reuters) -A U.S. judge ordered on Friday that Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil be immediately released from immigration custody, a major victory for rights groups that challenged what they called the Trump administration's unlawful targeting of a pro-Palestinian activist.
Khalil, a prominent figure in pro-Palestinian protests against Israel's war on Gaza, was arrested by immigration agents in the lobby of his university residence in Manhattan on March 8. President Donald Trump, a Republican, has called the protests antisemitic and vowed to deport foreign students who took part, and Khalil became the first target of this policy.
After hearing oral arguments from lawyers for Khalil and for the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz of Newark, New Jersey, ordered DHS to release him from custody at a jail for immigrants in rural Louisiana.
Farbiarz said the government had made no attempt to rebut evidence provided by Khalil's lawyers that he was not a flight risk nor a danger to public.
"There is at least something to the underlying claim that there is an effort to use the immigration charge here to punish the petitioner (Khalil)," Farbiarz said as he ruled from the bench, and punishing someone over a civil immigration matter is unconstitutional, he said.
Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the United States, says he is being punished for his political speech in violation of the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment. Khalil condemned antisemitism and racism in interviews with CNN and other news outlets last year.
"There is no basis for a local federal judge in New Jersey —who lacks jurisdiction — to order Khalil's release from a detention facility in Louisiana," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said in a statement. "We expect to be vindicated on appeal, and look forward to removing Khalil from the United States."
Earlier this month, Farbiarz had ruled that the government was violating Khalil's free speech rights by detaining him under a little-used law granting the U.S. secretary of state power to seek deportation of non-citizens whose presence in the country was deemed adverse to U.S. foreign policy interests.
But the judge declined on June 13 to order Khalil's release from a detention center in Jena, Louisiana, after President Donald Trump's administration said Khalil was being held on a separate charge that he withheld information from his application for lawful permanent residency.
Khalil's lawyers deny that allegation and say people are rarely detained on such charges. On June 16, they urged Farbiarz to grant a separate request from their client to be released on bail or be transferred to immigration detention in New Jersey to be closer to his family in New York.
At Friday's hearing, Farbiarz said it was "highly unusual" for the government to jail an immigrant accused of omissions in his application for U.S. permanent residency.
Khalil, 30, became a U.S. permanent resident last year, and his wife and newborn son are U.S. citizens.
Trump administration lawyers wrote in a June 17 filing that Khalil's request for release should be addressed to the judge overseeing his immigration case, an administrative process over whether he can be deported, rather than to Farbiarz, who is considering whether Khalil's March 8 arrest and subsequent detention were constitutional.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Federal appeals court rules Louisiana Ten Commandments school law is unconstitutional
A federal appeals court on Friday ruled that a Louisiana law requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in all public-school classrooms and state-funded universities in the state is unconstitutional. Three federal appellate judges on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Louisiana said they affirmed a lower district court's ruling that the statute was "facially unconstitutional." Last June, a group of parents sued the state over concerns the law that went into effect in January violates the separation of church and state. The district court issued a preliminary injunction on the law last November in the five school districts that involve plaintiffs. "H.B. 71 is plainly unconstitutional. The district court did not err," the appeals court said on Friday, referring to the statute. "H.B. 71's minimum requirements provide sufficient details about how the Ten Commandments must be displayed. Plaintiffs have shown that those displays will cause an "irreparable" deprivation of their First Amendment rights." The law was passed by Louisiana's Republican-controlled legislature last year and says the text of the Ten Commandments must be written in "large, easily readable font." "The Ten Commandments must be displayed with a 'context statement' about the 'History of the Ten Commandments in American Public Education,' and 'may' be displayed with 'the Mayflower Compact, the Declaration of Independence, and the Northwest Ordinance,'" the statute says. "We are grateful for this decision, which honors the religious diversity and religious-freedom rights of public school families across Louisiana," Rev. Darcy Roake, a plaintiff in the case represented by Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said. "As an interfaith family, we believe that our children should receive their religious education at home and within our faith communities, not from government officials." Rachel Laser, president and CEO of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, said in a statement: "This ruling will ensure that Louisiana families – not politicians or public-school officials – get to decide if, when and how their children engage with religion. It should send a strong message to Christian Nationalists across the country that they cannot impose their beliefs on our nation's public-school children. Not on our watch." Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said in a statement on Friday that she and her office "strongly disagree" with the ruling, according to "We will immediately seek relief from the full Fifth Circuit and, if necessary, the U.S. Supreme Court," she added. Fox News Digital has reached out to Murrill for comment. Arkansas has a similar law and other Republican states are on the verge of similar laws.
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
North Carolina Gov. Stein vetoes his first bills. They are on concealed carry and immigration
RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina Democratic Gov. Josh Stein vetoed his first bills on Friday, blocking for now Republican legislation that would let adults carry concealed handguns without a permit and make state agencies and local sheriffs more active in Trump administration's immigration crackdown. Stein, who took office in January, issued his formal objections to three measures backed by the GOP-controlled General Assembly presented to him last week. The former attorney general also had the option to sign any of them into law, or let them become law if he hadn't acted on the legislation soon. The vetoed measures now return to the legislature, where Republicans are one House seat shy of holding a veto-proof majority. Its leaders will decide whether to attempt overrides as early as next week. Voting so far followed party lines for one of the immigration measures, which in part would direct heads of several state law enforcement agencies, like the State Highway Patrol and State Bureau of Investigation, to cooperate with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. But one House Democrat ended up voting for the other immigration bill that Stein vetoed. It toughens a 2024 law that required sheriffs to help federal agents seeking criminal defendants. GOP prospects for enacting the permitless concealed gun measure, a longtime aspiration for gun-rights advocates, appear dimmer, because two House Republicans voted against the bill and 10 others were absent. Gun bill would let 18-year-olds carry concealed handgun In one veto message, Stein said the gun legislation, which would allow eligible people at least 18 years old to carry a concealed handgun, "makes North Carolinians less safe and undermines responsible gun ownership." Democratic lawmakers argued the same during legislative debate. Current law requires a concealed weapons holder to be at least 21 to obtain a permit. The person must submit an application to the local sheriff, pass a firearms safety training course and cannot 'suffer from a physical or mental infirmity that prevents the safe handling of a handgun" to obtain the permit. No safety training would be required if getting a permit is no longer necessary. 'Authorizing teenagers to carry a concealed weapon with no training whatsoever is dangerous,' Stein wrote. Gun-control groups praised the veto. Conservative advocates for the bill say removing the permit requirement would strengthen the safety of law-abiding citizens. 'Law-abiding North Carolinians shouldn't have to jump through hoops to effectively exercise their Second Amendment rights," Senate leader Phil Berger said in a press release criticizing the veto and planning for an override vote in his chamber. Permitless carry is already lawful in 29 states, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. North Carolina would also be one of the last states in the Southeast to implement that legislation. Immigration bills focus on state agencies, sheriffs One vetoed immigration bill would require four state law enforcement agencies to officially participate in the 287(g) program, which trains officers to interrogate defendants and determine their immigration status. An executive order by President Donald Trump urged his administration to maximize the use of 287(g) agreements. Stein wrote Friday the bill takes officers away from existing state duties at a time when law enforcement is already stretched thin. The measure also would direct state agencies to ensure noncitizens don't access certain state-funded benefits. But Stein said that people without lawful immigration status already can't receive them. The other vetoed bill attempts to expand a 2024 law — enacted over then-Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's veto — that directed jails to hold temporarily certain defendants whom ICE believe are in the country illegally, allowing time for immigration agents to pick them up. The vetoed bill would expand the list of crimes that a defendant is charged with that would require the jail administrator to attempt to determine the defendant's legal status. A jail also would have to tell ICE promptly that it is holding someone and essentially extends the time agents have to pick up the person. Stein said Friday while he supports sheriffs contacting federal immigration agents about defendants charged with dangerous crimes that they are holding, the law is unconstitutional because it directs sheriffs to keep defendants behind bars 48 hours beyond when they otherwise could be released for a suspected immigration violation. With the veto of this bill, House Speaker Destin Hall said, Stein sided with the 'most radical elements of his party's base over the safety and security of North Carolinians.' Latino advocates and other bill opponents had urged Stein to veto both immigration measures. They say the legislation would cause Hispanic residents to feel intimidated and fear law enforcement.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Hopes Of Lower Tariffs Against European Cars Are Fading Fast
One of the biggest promises of President Donald J. Trump's electoral race was to impose tariffs on foreign imports, and shortly after he was inaugurated for the second time, "tariffs" quickly became one of the buzzwords of his presidency. When it comes to cars, just about anything produced outside of American borders is going to get a lot more expensive, and due to vastly complex international supply chains, even domestically produced products could be impacted. But there was a glimmer of hope that the president would change - or at least soften - his stance against America's allies in Europe. European Union leaders had publicly expressed this expectation, citing a history of cooperation. However, as the July 9 deadline for tariffs to be further increased approaches, hope is fading, reports Reuters. The publication spoke to an anonymous official who reportedly noted that hopes of relief are fading faster now that tariffs have come into effect: "10% is a sticky issue. We are pressing them, but now they are getting revenues." A second source reportedly said the EU still would not accept the baseline rate but acknowledged that it would be difficult to change or abolish the measure. The European Union has also publicly declared that it would not accept double-digit tariffs as the United Kingdom has, but U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has ruled out the idea of any tariffs being lowered under the 10 percent baseline. What makes this worse is that the tariffs don't only apply to finished products; steel and aluminum from Europe face a 50 percent tariff, and that doesn't even include the standalone 25 percent tariff on foreign cars. The good news is that Europe, with a trade surplus of $236 billion with the U.S., needs to continue doing business with the largest economy in the world, so your local BMW dealer isn't closing up shop anytime soon. An EU official is quoted by Reuters as saying that the 10% baseline rate would "not massively erode competitive positions, especially if others receive the same treatment." And although hope of a compromise is fading, it hasn't been extinguished just yet. As noted by CarScoops, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen has confirmed that negotiations are still underway, despite President Trump's assertion earlier this week that the EU hadn't been fair thus far. "We're talking, but I don't feel that they're offering a fair deal yet," said President Trump. "They're either going to make a good deal or they'll just pay whatever we say they have to pay." Von der Leyen said, "It's complex, but we are advancing - that is good - and I push hard to pick up more speed. So we are mixed in the negotiations, and we will see what the end brings." The United States government is adamant that its long-standing partners are benefitting more from the status quo than America is, and that mindset means that any price increases as a result of tariffs on EU imports will likely not be small. That said, automakers are working to find ways of absorbing as much of the financial strain as possible, and one way of doing that is by pushing sales of existing inventory with incentives and employee pricing offers. Related: Mercedes CEO Has a Trump Tariff Deal That Could Reshape US-EU Auto Trade Copyright 2025 The Arena Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
