An immigration judge in Louisiana has determined that Mahmoud Khalil, a figure well-known for his pro-Hamas activism, should be deported. The ruling came from Judge Jamee Comans, highlighting Khalil’s deceptive practices surrounding his green card application. He concealed his connections to Palestinian extremism and left off crucial details regarding past employment and affiliations with dubious organizations.
Khalil, who has Palestinian roots and was born in Syria, made headlines during his time as a graduate student at Columbia University. He was particularly active in organizing pro-Hamas demonstrations on campus. His academic journey began in Beirut, Lebanon, where he was employed by the UNRWA until 2023—an agency often criticized for its infiltration by Hamas supporters. Under Biden’s presidency, the UNRWA received substantial funding, amounting to $1 billion, despite reports of Hamas ties among its staff members—twelve of whom participated in the horrific attacks on Israel on October 7.
Khalil’s rhetoric has been incendiary. He has openly threatened Columbia University due to its ties with Israeli institutions, stating, “As long as Columbia continues to invest and benefit from Israeli apartheid, the students will continue to resist.” He warned that resistance could go far beyond peaceful protests: “Not only protests and encampments, the limit is the sky.” These statements have raised alarms about his intentions and the implications of his actions.
On March 8, 2025, Khalil was arrested by immigration authorities under a provision that allows for the deportation of noncitizens who threaten U.S. foreign policy interests. His case faced significant legal challenges. In June, a federal judge appointed by Biden, Michael Farbiarz, halted deportation efforts initiated during the Trump administration. Farbiarz argued that the government’s claims about Khalil’s threat to foreign policy likely infringed upon constitutional rights, particularly free speech. Judge Jesse M. Furman, appointed by Obama, subsequently blocked Khalil’s removal, insisting that he could not be deported without a court order to the contrary. This ruling led to Khalil’s release, after which he quickly resumed leading pro-Hamas rallies, calling for a global intifada.
The latest ruling by Judge Comans updates the legal landscape surrounding Khalil’s residency. It finds him removable under U.S. immigration law, primarily due to the misrepresentations he made on his green card application. Khalil is now scheduled for deportation to either Syria, where he spent his early years, or Algeria, linked to his family heritage. Although the ruling adds a new twist to Khalil’s ongoing legal saga, it faces contradictions from earlier court decisions that prohibited his removal while deliberating on claims surrounding his detention.
Khalil’s situation illustrates the controversial nature of how individuals with foreign ties and radical positions are handled within the U.S. immigration system. His lawyers are poised to appeal the ruling, expecting that the Board of Immigration Appeals will act swiftly. However, they acknowledge the high bar for contesting deportations, as the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rarely grants stays for noncitizens.
Khalil has characterized the government’s actions as reflective of “fascist tactics” employed by the Trump administration, further complicating an already contentious atmosphere surrounding immigration and national security issues. The intersection of activism, legal residency, and foreign policy continues to evoke intense debate in American society.
As the legal process unfolds, one thing remains clear: Khalil’s case is emblematic of broader tensions within immigration law, free speech, and national security. It raises critical questions about who is allowed to stay in America and under what circumstances. The outcome will likely resonate far beyond Khalil himself, impacting perceptions of both immigration law and the ability of dissenting voices to operate freely within the U.S.
"*" indicates required fields
