Last year, Mahmoud Khalil helped his wife pick out a name for their baby while he sat in immigration detention.
For more than 100 days, Khalil waited in immigration custody to learn if he would be allowed to live in the U.S. with his son, whose birth he missed, or be sent to a country he had never lived in.
A year after Khalil was detained outside his New York apartment, his legal odyssey continues.
The detention last March of Khalil, then a Columbia University graduate student, marked the start of a nationwide effort to deport noncitizens who speak out about Israel’s war in Gaza. He now sits at the vanguard of a legal battle over immigrants’ due process and civil rights pitted against the Trump administration’s mass-detention and deportation policies.
“One year after, the government has not charged me with any crimes or presented any evidence that I committed wrongdoings whatsoever,” Khalil told NPR in a recent interview. “I was absolutely targeted for what I represent, which is a student movement that erupted against the U.S. support for Israel.”
Most recently, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani asked President Trump to drop the cases against Khalil. Khalil’s experience showcases the impact of Trump policy’s to detain and deport people in the country.
The Homeland Security Department and the White House did not respond to requests for comment on the status of Khalil’s case.
Life is different now for this legal permanent resident. He wears a baseball cap to cover his face.
He looks over his shoulder while walking on the street. He doesn’t go out alone with his son for fear he could be detained again.
Khalil’s legal fight became a full-time job
Over the last year, Khalil has made his legal defense his job — learning the ins and outs of the already complex immigration law system, and the complicated ways the Trump administration was trying to strip him of his permanent resident status. He is represented by more than 20 lawyers as his case winds itself through the federal court system, as well as within immigration courts, which are housed under the Justice Department.
At first, the administration deployed a rarely used statute to have Khalil detained. Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared Khalil’s presence in the U.S. had “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.”
His lawyers pushed back.
“There are procedures that the Secretary of State is supposed to follow in order to use this statute against a person,” said Amy Greer, one of Khalil’s attorneys. “We have never received any evidence that that procedure was followed.”
A federal judge in New Jersey sided with Khalil — saying the way the Trump administration acted was likely unconstitutional, because it penalized him for his protected political speech.
The administration has since tried a new strategy to revoke Khalil’s green card: They say Khalil lied on his green card application by leaving out information about work he did for the British Embassy and the U.N. agency that works with Palestinian refugees.
Khalil and his lawyers say those are baseless claims — that his work for the U.N. was as an intern supervised by Columbia University. They’ve appealed to the board that hears immigration court appeals.
“They chose immigration proceedings against me rather than any other avenue,” Khalil said. “Basically, by weaponizing immigration, they can deny me due process.”
In January, a panel in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that the judge who determined Khalil’s detention was likely unconstitutional did not have the authority to address the merits of Khalil’s case. The appeals court decided that Khalil, and all people facing immigration proceedings, must first complete their immigration proceedings before having their case heard by a federal court.
Khalil’s legal team plans to challenge this latest ruling, which could allow the government to place him once more in immigration detention while his case plays out before an immigration judge.
Immigration attorneys look to Khalil’s case as precedent-setting
A ruling this year could have implications far beyond Khalil.
“The First Amendment is not a dial. It’s either on or it’s off,” said Eric Lee, an immigration attorney tracking the case. “The First Amendment is already under threat or fatally undermined once we accept a situation where the rights of any immigrants to speak are being restricted because the First Amendment applies to all the people in this country.”
Lee pointed to other similar cases — some of which have found success. Earlier this year, a federal immigration judge terminated deportation proceedings against Mohsen Mahdawi, another pro-Palestinian activist detained last year. Another immigration judge terminated removal proceedings for Rümeysa Öztürk, a student and pro-Palestinian activist whose detention came under the national spotlight.
But Lee said not all defendants have won their legal fights, and they, like Khalil, are stuck in limbo.
“These cases are at the forefront of the battle over the First Amendment,” Lee said.
Khalil said he is prepared to see it go the distance.
“This case is not just about me; it’s about whether the government can detain a lawful resident for political speech,” Khalil said. “I fight because no one should go through all of this, just for speaking out, and speaking up against injustices.”
Transcript:
SCOTT DETROW, HOST:
One year ago, federal immigration officers detained a Columbia University graduate student who served as negotiator with university officials during pro-Palestinian protests that rocked the campus. His detention marked the start of a nationwide strategy to deport noncitizens who speak out about Israel’s war in Gaza. The case now sits at the vanguard of a legal battle over immigrants’ due process and civil rights. NPR’s Ximena Bustillo and Carrie Johnson report.
CARRIE JOHNSON, BYLINE: On March 8, 2025, men in plain clothes followed Mahmoud Khalil into the lobby of his New York apartment building.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
UNIDENTFIED IMMIGRATION OFFICER: You’re under arrest. So turn around.
MAHMOUD KHALIL: I can’t see it.
UNIDENTFIED IMMIGRATION OFFICER: Turn around. Turn around. Turn around. Turn around.
NOOR ABDALLA: OK. Let’s – let’s not…
UNIDENTFIED IMMIGRATION OFFICER: Stop resisting. Stop resisting.
ABDALLA: OK. OK. He’s not resisting. He’s giving me his phone.
UNIDENTFIED IMMIGRATION OFFICER: All right.
JOHNSON: Khalil remembers they wouldn’t show him a warrant, and they didn’t explain why they wanted to take him away.
KHALIL: So it felt absolutely like kidnapping – that I did not know who exactly these people were, especially without a warrant, without any identification.
JOHNSON: His wife, a U.S. citizen who was eight months pregnant, started filming the incident. Then she ran upstairs to get his green card and other papers. The immigration officers were unmoved. They walked him into an unmarked car parked across the street.
KHALIL: When this happened, like, in my head, I was so calm because I knew that maybe an hour or two hours I would be out after they verify the facts.
JOHNSON: Instead, Khalil spent 104 days in detention, mostly in Louisiana, far from home, until his attorneys could win his release. It’s a legal odyssey that’s still unfolding.
KHALIL: One year after my arrest, the government did not charge me with any crimes or hasn’t actually presented any evidence that I committed any wrongdoings whatsoever.
XIMENA BUSTILLO, BYLINE: Khalil’s case captured the attention of the White House. Here’s President Trump speaking to reporters in March of last year.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I think that guy – we ought to get him. I heard his statements, too. They were pretty bad. And I think we ought to get him the hell out of the country.
BUSTILLO: At first, the administration relied on a legal justification from Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Rubio deployed a rarely used statute to declare that Khalil’s presence in the U.S. had potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences. Khalil says the administration wanted to make an example out of him because of his vocal support for Gaza.
KHALIL: I was absolutely targeted for what I represent, which is a student movement that erupted against the U.S. support to Israel.
BUSTILLO: His lawyer, Amy Greer, says Congress designed that old law from 1952 to cover powerful political figures whose travel to the U.S. could actually implicate foreign policy.
AMY GREER: There are procedures that the secretary of state is supposed to follow in order to use this statute against a person. We have never received any evidence that procedure was followed.
BUSTILLO: A federal judge in New Jersey sided with Khalil, saying Secretary Rubio’s use of this statute against Khalil for his protected political speech was likely unconstitutional. Immigration lawyer Eric Lee is watching Khalil’s case, which he says could set a precedent for noncitizens’ rights to free speech.
ERIC LEE: The First Amendment is not a dial. It’s either on or it’s off.
BUSTILLO: Lee has his own clients who have been in detention for months on similar grounds.
LEE: The First Amendment is already under threat or fatally undermined once we accept a situation where the rights of any immigrants to speak are being restricted because the First Amendment applies to all the people in this country.
JOHNSON: Nine days after immigration officers came for Khalil and after Khalil filed a legal challenge, the Trump administration made a new argument. They say Khalil made misrepresentations on his green card, that he left out information about some work he did for the British embassy and the U.N. Agency for Palestine Refugees. Khalil and his lawyer say those are baseless claims, that his U.N. work was an internship supervised by his university.
KHALIL: They chose immigration proceedings against me rather than any other avenue because basically, by weaponizing immigration, they can deny me due process.
JOHNSON: His cases are playing out in both federal court and the immigration court system. His legal troubles are so complex that he’s got more than 20 lawyers to navigate them. In January, the 3rd Circuit Federal Appeals Court ruled Khalil could not go to the federal courts to challenge his detention until his immigration proceedings end. A ruling this year could have implications far beyond Khalil. Steve Vladeck’s a law professor at Georgetown University.
STEVE VLADECK: We have a president who’s been committed quite publicly to destroying any vestige of independence within the immigration court system and to firing immigration judges who don’t do his bidding.
BUSTILLO: If the 3rd Circuit ruling stands, that means it could take years for immigrants’ cases to work their way through immigration courts and then for independent federal judges to consider important constitutional questions like freedom of speech and government retaliation. Unlike many people in the immigration system, Khalil is reunited with his family, at least for now. But life is different. He wears a baseball cap to cover his face. He looks behind his shoulder walking down the street. He doesn’t go out alone with his young son for fear that he could be detained again.
KHALIL: Very hurtful – the fact that you cannot go with your kid to the park alone just to walk.
BUSTILLO: His multiple legal battles have taken over his day to day as he awaits to hear whether he will be deported far away from his family.
KHALIL: This case has been my full-time job.
JOHNSON: And that job is far from over. Khalil’s son turns 1 in April, and a celebration to mark the end of Ramadan will come in mid-March. Those moments weigh on his mind.
KHALIL: That’s one of my biggest fears, to be honest, now – that I will not be here for his first birthday or even for the first Eid together – because these are important milestones.
JOHNSON: Carrie Johnson.
BUSTILLO: Ximena Bustillo, NPR News.