Student negotiator Mahmoud Khalil on the Columbia University campus in New York at an anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian protest encampment on April 29, 2024. (Ted Shaffrey/AP)Federal immigration authorities arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and recent Columbia University graduate who was a prominent negotiator during pro-Palestinian campus protests, on March 8, 2025. Khalil was a lawful permanent resident of the United States at the time, making the case substantially different from an ordinary student-visa revocation.
The arrest quickly developed into a major legal dispute over immigration authority, national security, due process and First Amendment protections. The Trump administration said Khalil's continued presence in the United States posed foreign-policy concerns, while his attorneys argued that the government was targeting him because of protected political speech.
What happened when Khalil was arrested
According to a March 19, 2025 federal court opinion, Department of Homeland Security agents approached Khalil outside his Columbia University apartment in New York at about 8:30 p.m. on March 8 and told him they were taking him into custody.
The court record says agents initially told Khalil that his student visa had been revoked. His attorney, Amy Greer, informed the agents that Khalil was no longer in the United States on a student visa because he had become a lawful permanent resident. An agent then told Greer that the State Department had also revoked Khalil's green card and that he would appear before an immigration judge.
Khalil had entered the United States on a student visa in December 2022 to attend Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs. He married a U.S. citizen in 2023 and became a lawful permanent resident in 2024, according to subsequent federal court records. His LinkedIn profile identified professional and academic experience before and during his time at Columbia.
After his arrest, Khalil was taken first to the ICE field office at 26 Federal Plaza in Manhattan. He was subsequently moved to New Jersey and then to an immigration detention facility in Louisiana. His transfer complicated the early litigation over which federal court had jurisdiction to hear his challenge to the detention.
What the Trump administration alleged
The Department of Homeland Security publicly said at the time that Khalil had led activities that were "aligned to Hamas." The government did not, in its initial public statement, charge Khalil with providing material support to Hamas or announce a criminal charge against him.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio also posted on X that the administration intended to revoke visas or green cards of people it characterized as Hamas supporters.
The government's formal immigration case relied in part on a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows removal when the secretary of state determines that a noncitizen's presence or activities in the United States could have serious adverse foreign-policy consequences. A later federal appeals court record stated that Rubio made such a determination concerning Khalil.
That distinction is important: the administration's foreign-policy determination was an immigration ground for seeking removal, not a criminal conviction or finding that Khalil had committed a terrorism offense.
Khalil's lawyers challenged the detention
Greer said immediately after the arrest that Khalil's legal team would challenge the government's action in court. His attorneys argued that the detention and attempted removal were retaliation for his political advocacy and therefore violated constitutional protections for speech and due process.
Khalil had become one of the most visible representatives of Columbia University Apartheid Divest during the campus demonstrations over Israel's war in Gaza. He spoke with reporters and participated in negotiations between protesters and university administrators.
He was also involved in negotiations surrounding protests at Barnard College, which is affiliated with Columbia. An online biography described previous work in diplomacy, including experience with the British Embassy in Beirut.
Why the green-card issue mattered
A green card gives its holder lawful permanent resident status. It does not make someone immune from removal proceedings, but permanent residents generally have greater procedural protections than people seeking admission to the United States or people present solely on temporary visas.
The arrest therefore did not itself cancel Khalil's permanent-resident status or establish that he was deportable. The government had to pursue removal through immigration proceedings, where Khalil could challenge the asserted legal grounds.
The case also raised a broader constitutional question: how far the executive branch may rely on immigration law against a lawful permanent resident when the disputed conduct includes political advocacy. Khalil's attorneys argued that his speech was protected by the First Amendment. The government argued that immigration law gave the secretary of state authority to make the relevant foreign-policy determination.
The arrest came during a wider confrontation with Columbia
Khalil's detention occurred as the Trump administration intensified pressure on universities over allegations that they had failed to protect Jewish students from antisemitism during demonstrations related to the Israel-Gaza war.
Days before the arrest, the administration announced the cancellation of roughly $400 million in federal grants and contracts involving Columbia. The White House later described the move as part of its campaign against antisemitism on college campuses.
Trump had also written on Truth Social that universities allowing what he called unlawful protests could lose federal funding and that foreign participants whom the administration classified as "agitators" could face removal from the United States.
Columbia did not initially comment directly on Khalil's individual case. In a March 9 statement, the university said it would comply with legal obligations while supporting its community and respecting students' legal rights. Columbia also said law-enforcement officers generally need a judicial warrant to enter non-public university areas.
Supporters and critics sharply disagreed
Civil-liberties and immigrant-rights organizations condemned the detention, arguing that the government was using immigration enforcement to punish political speech. The New York Civil Liberties Union and other organizations described the case as a serious threat to First Amendment protections.
Some pro-Israel activists and organizations, by contrast, welcomed Khalil's detention and accused him of playing a central role in disruptive campus demonstrations. The Columbia Jewish Alumni Association called him a protest "ringleader," an allegation that reflected the group's characterization rather than a judicial finding.
Columbia professor Shai Davidai, a prominent critic of the university's pro-Palestinian protest movement, had also called publicly for Khalil's removal before the arrest.
What happened later
The legal dispute continued well beyond the initial March 2025 arrest. Federal immigration authorities later added another removal allegation, asserting that Khalil had made material omissions on his application for permanent residence. Khalil disputed the government's allegations.
In June 2025, a federal judge in New Jersey issued a preliminary injunction barring removal based on the secretary of state's foreign-policy determination and later ordered Khalil released from immigration detention. He was released on June 20 after more than three months in custody.
Separate immigration proceedings nevertheless continued. An immigration judge found Khalil removable on both the foreign-policy ground and the government's separate allegation concerning his permanent-residence application and ordered removal to Algeria or Syria. The Board of Immigration Appeals later rejected his attempt to overturn the removal case.
The jurisdictional dispute then reached the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. In a January 15, 2026 decision, the court held that federal immigration law channeled Khalil's challenges arising from the removal proceedings into the statutory immigration-review process and that the New Jersey district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over those claims. The court therefore ordered the lower court's relevant rulings vacated.
The Third Circuit declined rehearing in May 2026. Khalil's attorneys then began seeking U.S. Supreme Court review. According to the Supreme Court docket, Justice Samuel Alito granted Khalil additional time to file a petition for review, extending the deadline to October 19, 2026.
As of September 2026, the legal fight therefore remained unresolved. The original March 2025 arrest did not by itself establish criminal wrongdoing, and the government's immigration allegations, Khalil's constitutional claims and the proper route for judicial review became subjects of continuing litigation.
0 Comments