A federal immigration judge last week ordered the deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student tied to pro-Palestinian protests, to Algeria or Syria. The ruling emerged publicly through court papers filed by Khalil’s lawyers on Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2025. Khalil, a green card holder, claims retaliation by the Trump administration.
CBS News reported that Khalil alleges months of detention and deportation efforts stem from a policy targeting foreign students protesting Israel’s actions against Hamas. The Trump administration counters with accusations of “hateful behavior and rhetoric.” This clash frames a broader legal battle over free speech and immigration status.
On Friday, Louisiana-based Judge Jamee Comans denied Khalil’s waiver request to halt removal, citing alleged misrepresentation on green card paperwork. She ordered deportation to Algeria, his citizenship country, or Syria, his birthplace. Khalil now has 30 days to appeal to the Justice Department’s Board of Immigration Appeals.
If the appeal fails, Khalil loses green card status and must leave, his lawyers warned U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz on Wednesday. They plan to amend his lawsuit, citing procedural flaws. They argue Comans rushed judgment without a proper evidence hearing, breaching due process.
Khalil’s fight with federal authorities began in March with his detention in New York. He’s among several international students held for campus activism, which the administration labels antisemitic—a charge protesters reject. His case spotlights tensions over protest rights under President Donald Trump’s policies.
Initially, the administration pushed deportation under a law citing “adverse foreign policy consequences.” In June, Judge Farbiarz blocked this, noting harm to Khalil’s career and speech. A month later, Khalil was freed from Louisiana detention, but the case shifted to paperwork misrepresentation claims.
Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security Tricia McLaughlin defended the deportation push. “It is a privilege to be granted a visa or green card to live and study in the United States. When you advocate for violence, glorify and support terrorists that relish the killing of Americans, and harass Jews, take over buildings and deface property, that privilege should be revoked,” she stated.
Conservatives backing President Trump might applaud McLaughlin’s firm stance, seeing it as upholding immigration integrity. If Khalil’s actions or rhetoric crossed into incitement, as alleged, shouldn’t legal consequences follow? For many on the right, privileges demand accountability, not unchecked protest rights.
The government claims Khalil omitted past ties, like a U.N. agency role with Palestinians and ongoing work at Lebanon’s British Embassy, on forms. Last week, Comans ruled this willful deceit, not ignorance, barred a waiver. She deemed his conduct’s gravity unworthy of court discretion.
Khalil refutes misrepresentation, asserting he was merely an unpaid intern via Columbia, not a U.N. member, and ceased embassy work in 2022. His lawyers on Wednesday dismissed claims as “baseless” and “pretextual.” He insists his Columbia protests were peaceful, denying violence or antisemitism.
For conservatives under President Trump’s leadership, Khalil’s defense may ring hollow against documented omissions. If rules were bent, as Comans found, isn’t deportation a fair outcome? The right might argue legal immigration demands full transparency, not selective disclosure for convenience.
The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky has underscored such principles. “Immigration laws must be enforced to protect national integrity,” he noted (https://www.heritage.org/immigration/commentary/immigration-laws-must-be-enforced). This aligns with conservative support for strict adherence over activist exemptions.
As Khalil’s 30-day appeal window ticks, conservatives might view this as a test of Trump’s immigration crackdown. His prior detention and release in Louisiana reflect a system balancing security and rights. Yet, the right prioritizes rule of law over protest claims.
With lawyers amending the lawsuit before Farbiarz, the case could stretch further. Conservatives supporting President Trump may hope for swift resolution, ensuring deportation if misrepresentation holds. Empathy for genuine grievances exists, but legal boundaries must stand firm against alleged deceit.
Ultimately, Khalil’s deportation order, issued last week and publicized on Sept. 18, 2025, underscores a fierce policy divide. For conservatives, it’s a win for accountability under Trump’s watch, though challenges loom. This clash over activism and immigration law promises more legal fireworks ahead.
