Mahmoud Khalil Case: ordered to show evidence, the government affirms that the authority of Rubio
Lawyers for the militant of the University of Columbia, Mahmoud Khalil, argued Thursday that the government had not presented any evidence to prove that its presence in the United States poses an unfavorable consequence of foreign policy, that the Trump administration argued that this is the reason for its deportation from the United States
On Friday, Khalil should appear before an immigration judge in Louisiana, a hearing intervening after the judge gave the government a period earlier this week to present evidence to support several allegations against Khalil, including that he distorted information on his request for a green card.
Khalil was arrested by immigration and customs application in his Columbia accommodation last month. He holds a green card and a legal permanent resident married to an American citizen, nine months pregnant.
The government has concluded proof that a two-page memo signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he had found that Khalil’s presence in the United States “would compromise an imperative interest in American foreign policy”.
The memo makes no mention of the previous allegations according to which he distorted information on his request for a green card and is more doubled by an obscure section of the Immigration and Nationality Act which judges the deporable migrants “if the Secretary of State has a reasonable reason to believe that the presence or activities of extraterrestrials in the United States would have consequences on the potentially serious foreign policy for the United States”.
The two -page memo also argues why another person, whose name is expelled, should be expelled in the same arguments.
In the memo, Rubio affirms that he has the power to determine that a person is deportable even if his actions are “otherwise legal”.
Rubio wrote that Khalil should be expelled because of his alleged role in “anti-Semitic demonstrations and disruptive activities, which promotes a hostile environment for Jewish students in the United States”.
Marc Van der Hout, one of Khalil’s lawyers, criticized the note strongly at a zoom press conference on Thursday.
Rubio “talks about the activity of the first amendment to the United States and the effect on people in the United States, his” determination “has absolutely nothing to do with foreign policy”.
Student negotiator Mahmoud Khalil is on the campus of Columbia University in New York in a pro-Palestinian protest camp on April 29, 2024.
Ted Shaffrey / AP
Van der Hout has also described as “false” the previous allegations concerning false alleged statements on the request of Khalil visa and on the negotiations in which he participated in Columbia on the student camp.
“But that does not make the accusation of foreign policy, and there is no support for the government’s allegations concerning a false declaration,” said Van der Hout. “We are not at all concerned about that.”
Khalil lawyers said they did not think that the government had presented any evidence to suggest that it should be removable under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The case could define the previous one that the government can silence its criticisms and withdraw them, in what can become “a dangerous slope,” said Van der Hout.
“What the letter Rubio is talking about is that they try to protect-they say-the Jews in the United States, anti-Semitism. But what is anti-Semitism? He criticizes Israel and the United States for the slaughter in Gaza and in Palestine,” said Van der Hout.
“This is what it is about, and this is what this affair is really focused on the rights of people in this country, citizens and immigrants – who are all protected by the Constitution, by the first amendment – to be able to speak whatever their point of view, popular or not,” said Van der Hout.
Khalil’s lawyers plan to ask to deposit Rubio before the court to understand what reasons he had to determine that the presence of Khalil in the United States presents a risk for the interests of American foreign policies.
Mahmoud Khalil talks to the media members of the Rafah camp revolt at Columbia University during the current conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas in Gaza, New York, June 1, 2024.
Jeenah Moon / Reuters, file
The immigration judge said that she would conclude on the question of whether Khalil is removable on Friday, according to Khalil lawyers.
“But we are far from the end of the road if it happens,” said Johnny Sinodis, lawyer and partner of Van der Hout, who represents Khalil on Thursday. If the immigration judge determines that Khalil is, in fact, removable, the case will go to a next phase, but Khalil can still plead his right to stay in the United States
“This process takes place before the immigration court, and it will most certainly require several other hearings before a final decision can be made in the immigration case,” said Sinodis.
