ICE arrests Palestinian activist who helped lead Columbia University protests, his lawyer says

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You’re still prioritizing the Islamic terrorist supporting Jew-hater over the Jewish kids.

You sure have a lot of tolerance for antisemitism on campus. Jew-hate is at its highest peak since WWII, and you’re OK with HAMAS-supporting foreigners coming onto our soil and making it worse.

Libs would NEVER tolerate what’s going on if violence were against blacks, Muslims, or gays.

Especially if it was a black, gay Muslim!

 

[j-mac]

"Affiliation." False accusations are the tried and true method every dictator uses to arrest anyone who dares protest in their country. They'll automatically labeled as "terrorists" or affiliated with "terrorists" in order to silence them.

Doesn't matter....Turns out the Sec of State has declared that he is a National foreign policy threat, meaning a National Security threat, there fore, Batta, Batta, sa wing, he's outta here. Buh Bye.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Try yelling "FIRE!" in a movie theatre, and see where you end up.

However, the true question is yelling "MOVIE" in a crowded firehouse legal?

 

[Kondor3]

Even actual Nazis have a right to protest. That's the whole point of the first amendment. Freedom of the press, right to assemble, Freedom of speech. The only trash here are those who want to eliminate our bill of rights.

IslamoNazis do not have a right to take-over colleage campuses nor pose a mortal danger to Jewish students.

Not in this country, anyway.

And those responsible for planning and executing such events, when not a US citizen, can (and should) simply be deported.

Don't like it? You can always apply to emigrate to the Islamic Democracy of your choice.

 

[Rawley]

Yall can't be this dumb right? Read what I wrote to Meister in post #206

Violent takeovers of schools by Jew hating terrorist supporters is not "protesting"

But please, continue your ignorant support for this man. He's the perfect poster boy for your cult

 

[CowboyTed]

This doesn't look good for the Trump Admin

"
The agents told the couple that Khalil was being detained because his student visa had been revoked.

When his wife provided documents proving he was a green card holder, the agents said that was also being revoked and took him away in handcuffs, according to a lawsuit Khalil’s attorneys filed challenging his detention."

What to know about Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia protester arrested by ICE and facing deportation

A U.S. green card holder faces deportation after helping lead student protests at Columbia University in New York last spring over the war in Gaza.

apnews.com

So they can revoke Student Visas but they can't revoke Green Cards... You need to be convicted of an actual serious crime to do that.
---

Now the DHS said that “activities aligned to Hamas".... Well, if you wake up in the morning, so did a terrorist... You have to be far more specific than that...

So three days later they stated : "Khalil organized protests where pro-Hamas propaganda was distributed."... If true, is that illegal... Seems very wishy washy, talking Hamas political postion doesn't mean he is pushing violence.

What to know about Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia protester arrested by ICE and facing deportation

A U.S. green card holder faces deportation after helping lead student protests at Columbia University in New York last spring over the war in Gaza.

apnews.com

FYI: Antisemitism is not a crime...

"
Even if Khalil’s speech was hateful, and even if it was antisemitic, it was protected by the 1st Amendment. The Supreme Court repeatedly has made clear that hate speech is constitutionally protected and cannot be a basis for punishment by the government. In fact, even if Khalil voiced his support for Hamas, that, too, is an idea that can be expressed under the 1st Amendment. Speaking in favor of Hamas is not, by any stretch of the definition, material support for a terrorist organization.

Thus, even those who loathe what Khalil said should fervently defend his right to say it and oppose the Trump administration’s actions. Otherwise, the federal government would have the power to deem any view so objectionable that it could deport noncitizens expressing it. As I constantly explain to my students, the only way my speech will be safe tomorrow is to protect the speech that I detest today."

Contributor: Mahmoud Khalil's pro-Palestinian comments are protected speech, not grounds for deportation

I have been outspoken about my concern about increasing antisemitism on campuses. But deporting activists violates the 1st Amendment and does nothing to combat antisemitism.

www.latimes.com

This is not about supporting what he said, this is about his right to say it.

 

[Rawley]

Openly support terrorism?

How exactly did he do that?

Pro-Palestinian Group at Columbia Now Backs ‘Armed Resistance’ by Hamas​

Columbia University Apartheid Divest has withdrawn an apology it made last spring for a member who said “Zionists don’t deserve to live.”


The pro-Palestinian group that sparked the student encampment movement at Columbia University in response to the Israel-Hamas war is becoming more hard-line in its rhetoric, openly supporting militant groups fighting Israel and rescinding an apology it made after one of its members said the school was lucky he wasn’t out killing Zionists.

“We support liberation by any means necessary, including armed resistance,” the group, Columbia University Apartheid Divest, said in its statement revoking the apology.

The group marked the anniversary of the Oct. 7 attack on Israel by distributing a newspaper with a headline that used Hamas’s name for it: “One Year Since Al-Aqsa Flood, Revolution Until Victory,” it read, over a picture of Hamas fighters breaching the security fence to Israel. And the group posted an essay calling the attack a “moral, military and political victory” and quoting Ismail Haniyeh, the assassinated former political leader of Hamas.


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/09/nyregion/columbia-pro-palestinian-group-hamas.html[/quote]

hat tip to Wild Bill Kelsoe

 

[struth]

Yes, without any evidence of it. I say put in it court and have the government present its case.

That’s what a deportation hearing is for

 

[struth]

Khalil’s legal team already secured a federal hearing, meaning the fight is happening exactly where it should--in court. No, he hasn’t filed a habeas petition, because he doesn’t need to. A judge has already put a hold on his deportation, and the case is moving forward. You’re acting like he was dumped into some legal black hole when, in reality, he’s getting the due process immigration law provides--limited, yes, but not nonexistent.

And yes, immigration proceedings may be civil, but they aren’t a slap on the wrist. People get detained, locked up, and fast-tracked out of the country, all without the full constitutional protections of a criminal trial. That’s the system, and if you think it’s fair game to deport green card holders for speech, you’d better be prepared for the constitutional challenge that follows.

The real issue isn’t whether he "just got picked up"--it’s whether the government can use immigration law to purge political opponents under the guise of national security. It appears (correct me if I'm wrong) that you act like this is just business as usual, but it isn’t. The First Amendment doesn’t vanish because someone isn’t a citizen, and the Supreme Court has never settled whether you can deport someone purely for speech. If Khalil is the first test case, that answer is coming soon. Let’s see if you still feel so confident when the courts weigh in.

Haha they didn’t secure one, he gets an art 2 deportation hearing

 

[struth]

Okay, you want to take deeper dive, okay, let's do it:

See, it's a thorny constitutional question: Can noncitizens be deported purely for their speech? The answer, like most things in immigration law, is a mess of statutory authority, conflicting precedents, and untested constitutional limits.

The Law as Written

Under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B) and § 1227(a)(4)(B), noncitizens who endorse or espouse terrorism can be denied entry or deported. “Terrorist activity” here is broadly defined--it’s not just planting bombs but even advocating for groups deemed terrorist organizations. Congress has always had wide latitude in keeping people out, as confirmed in Kleindienst v. Mandel, but what about kicking them out once they’re already here?

The First Amendment Problem

Noncitizens inside the U.S. have First Amendment rights--Bridges v. Wixon made that clear. You can’t deport someone for saying things that a citizen could legally say. But then there’s Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, which upheld the deportation of Communist Party members, though it leaned on Dennis v. United States, back when we were jailing people for talking about communism.

More recent cases split. The Ninth Circuit in American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm. v. Reno said First Amendment protections apply in deportation cases, while Price v. INS went the other way, deferring to Congress on immigration matters.

Selective Prosecution and Politics

The big red flag here is viewpoint discrimination. The executive order targets “Hamas sympathizers,” but not, say, someone cheering on Israeli bombings. The Supreme Court loathes viewpoint-based restrictions--Rosenberger v. Rector being a prime example. And while Reno v. American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Comm. says deportation proceedings can’t be challenged on selective prosecution grounds, it didn’t answer whether the government can initiate deportations purely for speech.

Where This Is Headed

Trump’s plan, if implemented, would almost certainly be challenged. The courts have never fully settled whether lawful residents can be deported just for speech, but in today’s First Amendment-friendly climate, the government’s odds don’t look great. If this goes to SCOTUS, it might finally force a ruling on whether noncitizens get the same speech protections as citizens when the government wields its deportation hammer.

Short version: It’s murky, it’s legally dubious, and if this crackdown actually happens, it’s bound to end up in the courts.

I'm not saying green card holders have never had their rights violated, but a savvy green card holder, if he or she can afford it, does have recourse, deportation isn't automatic and should never be achieved willy nilly, based on what side of the bed the judge got out of the bed in the morning.

Yes they can be. A green card or visa is a privilege not a right

 

[CowboyTed]

So what law did this guy break?

Was a leader in an Organisation who wrote this as its manifesto:

Columbia University Apartheid Divest: Who we are

<i>“The Palestinian cause is not a cause for Palestinians only, but a cause for every revolutionary, wherever [they are], as a cause of the exploited and oppressed masses in our era.” - Ghassan Kanafani</i>

www.columbiaspectator.com

It seems they don't like antisemitism either...

Objecting to Isreal policies in the occupied Palestine is not antisemitism, despite what the Israeli Government says.

 

[Rawley]

So they can revoke Student Visas but they can't revoke Green Cards...

Sure they can

You need to be convicted of an actual serious crime to do that.

Nope. See section 4(c) in particular

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1227&num=0&edition=prelim

 

[Thinker101]

Yes, without any evidence of it. I say put in it court and have the government present its case.

Court? Immigration violations don't typically go to court.

 

[otto105]

Court? Immigration violations don't typically go to court.

Hilarious

 

[CowboyTed]

Sure they can

Nope. See section 4(c) in particular

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title8-section1227&num=0&edition=prelim

They can try and prove that in court.

Interesting but I say that they have to prove he is Antisemitic and pro-Hamas first...

Even Jewish Post thinks this is too far...

 

[Rawley]

They can try and prove that in court.

Interesting but I say that they have to prove he is Antisemitic and pro-Hamas first...

Even Jewish Post thinks this is too far...

Link?

 

[otto105]

Link?

As ICE arrests Mahmoud Khalil, some Jews ask if this is the fight they signed up for

Excerpt:

“Antisemitism is on the rise, and we should take that very seriously, but we are not going to be able to arrest and deport our way out of the serious problem of antisemitism,” Udi Ofer, the former deputy national political director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said in an interview. “Attempting to deport green card holders for their student advocacy is the kind of action we normally associate with repressive regimes.”

 

[krichton]

My point is the Freedom of Speech has it's limitations, something you
are not aware of from your postings.

Yes, when you're committing a crime, like endangering the lives of people in a theater. Protesting the government or just saying whatever dumb opinion you may have is protected speech, which the government can't arrest and prosecute you for. Opinions are not prosecutable or arrestable. These are not considered crimes in America.

 

[CowboyTed]

Link?

Mahmoud Khalil's arrest raises questions among some US Jews | The Jerusalem Post

The ideologically polarizing motivation that leaves some Jewish leaders wary of the administration’s crusade against antisemitism.

www.jpost.com

American Jewish Committee says it’s ‘appalled’ by Mahmoud Khalil’s views but does not praise his arrest

Another large Jewish group, Jewish Federations of North America, said it was not commenting on the arrest by immigration officers.

forward.com

 

[CowboyTed]

Right a small piece of digging...

The accusation of being a terrorist supporter looks like it could come from either Shai Davidai and pro-Israel organization Betar.

"Davidai, who had been suspended from campus last year over allegations he had harassed university staff, denied collaborating with the Trump administration to get Khalil deported. “Let me be absolutely clear: I have never had a direct line to the administration. Even if I did, I would never use such influence to target an individual. This is not who I am or what I stand for,” Davidai told Zeteo. “Like many, I’ve called out Khalil’s repeated legal violations and demanded accountability. But as I always remind my students, just because one event follows another doesn’t mean it caused it.”

In online posts, Davidai had called Khalil a “terrorist supporter” and suggested he should be deported, tagging Secretary of State Marco Rubio."

FYI: Shai Davidai was born in Isreal

SCOOP: Emails Show Mahmoud Khalil Asked Columbia for Protection a Day Before He Was Detained

"I haven’t been able to sleep, fearing that ICE or a dangerous individual might come to my home. I urge you to intervene and provide the necessary protections to prevent further harm."

zeteo.com

The Far-Right Group Building a List of Pro-Palestine Activists to Deport

Betar U.S. said it has shared with the Trump administration a list of the “names of hundreds of terror supporters.”

theintercept.com

Tensions soar at NYU after threats, vandalism tied to Zionist group

University investigating threatening social media posts from Betar USA and allegedly linked act of vandalism; Betar denies involvement in vandalism but accuses NYU of failing to protect Jewish students from pro-Palestinian activists

www.ynetnews.com

So by the looks of it Betar, an organisation which has promoted violence against Palestinians look like the ones who made unfounded allegations against Mahmoud Khalil. Mahmoud Khalil is then arrested...

I am not saying to pick sides but look what is happening to free speech...