Court says judge didn’t have jurisdiction to order Mahmoud Khalil’s release


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Summary

Appeals court decision

An appeals court ruled that a federal judge did not have jurisdiction to order former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil’s release from immigrant detention.

Legal process

The judges ruled 2-1 that Khalil needs to challenge his case in immigration court first, then he can appeal.

Khalil: ‘Deeply disappointing’

Khalil said that while ruling is “deeply disappointing” it “does not break our resolve.”


Full story

An appeals court on Thursday overturned a lower court’s decision to release former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil from immigration detention. While the panel of judges did not rule on the merits of the case, it did state that a judge in New Jersey does not have jurisdiction over it.

Federal laws require Khalil to challenge his case in immigration court first, the judges said in a 2-1 ruling. Then, he can appeal. 

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

“That scheme ensures that petitioners get just one bite at the apple — not zero or two. But it also means that some petitioners, like Khalil, will have to wait to seek relief for allegedly unlawful government conduct,” judges Thomas Hardiman and Stephanos Bibas said in their ruling. “Because Khalil raises legal questions that a PFR (petition for review) court can meaningfully review later on, the INA (Immigration and Nationality Act) bars him from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition.”

Judge Arianna Freeman dissented, writing that “Khalil’s case requires us to tease these strands apart,” and that it can be decided by the district court.

“Khalil says his claims are now-or-never ones because his injuries are ongoing and his rights are ‘being violated, now,’” Freeman wrote. “But his claims raise legal questions challenging the government’s very basis for trying to remove (and thus detaining) him.”

Khalil, in a statement, said the ruling is “deeply disappointing, but it does not break our resolve.”

“The door may have been opened for potential re-detainment down the line, but it has not closed our commitment to Palestine and to justice and accountability,” he wrote. “I will continue to fight, through every legal avenue and with every ounce of determination, until my rights, and the rights of others like me, are fully protected.”

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called the ruling a “vindication of the rule of law and the simple truth that DHS has argued from the beginning: an immigration judge, not a district judge, has the authority to decide if Mr. Khalil should have been released.”

She maintained that the Trump administration “acted well within its statutory and constitutional authority to detain Khalil” and said “DHS will work to enforce his lawful removal order.”

The American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey said the Trump administration cannot re-detain Khalil until the order officially takes effect, which will not happen while he can still appeal. This can mean having the case reviewed by all judges on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, or even the U.S. Supreme Court.

“The Trump administration violated the Constitution by targeting Mahmoud Khalil, detaining him thousands of miles from home, and retaliating against him for his speech,”  Bobby Hodgson, deputy legal director at the New York Civil Liberties Union, said. “Dissent is not grounds for detention or deportation, and we will continue to pursue all legal options to ensure Mahmoud’s rights are vindicated.”

Khalil’s cases

Immigration officials arrested Khalil, a legal resident in the U.S., last March at his apartment in Manhattan. Khalil participated in pro-Palestinian protests and campus encampments at Columbia in 2024. 

The Trump administration accused the 30-year-old of being a “pro-Hamas sympathizer,” without providing evidence to support the claim

In a two-page memo obtained by The Associated Press, Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued that Khalil could be expelled because of his beliefs, and accused him of antisemitic conduct and participating in disruptive protests. Khalil has denied these allegations of antisemitism, saying that he was criticizing Israel and the United States over what is happening in Gaza, and that the federal government is trying to suppress this speech.

After being detained for more than 100 days, Khalil was released in June when U.S. District Judge Michael E. Farbiarz ruled that it was likely that Rubio’s attempted deportation on foreign policy grounds would be ruled unconstitutional. In a separate order, Farbiarz declared that Khalil was neither a danger nor a flight risk.

Department of Homeland Security officials also alleged Khalil failed to disclose information on his green card application. 

In September, a U.S. immigration judge denied Khalil’s motion for a waiver preventing his removal from the U.S. and ordered that he be deported to either Algeria or his native Syria.

Prosecutors have yet to charge Khalil with a crime in either case.

Deportations challenged in court

Four other student activists, Rumeysa Ozturk, Mohsen Mahdawi, Badar Khan Suri and Yunseo Chung, were similarly accused by the Trump administration of being a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests. 

The New York Times reported that these students challenged their own deportations or detainments in separate, individual lawsuits. Those who were detained, the outlet wrote, were later ordered to be released.

Massachusetts Federal District Judge William G. Young ruled in September that the Trump administration chilled these students’ speech with arrests he said were aimed at striking fear to those critical of Israel.

At a Thursday hearing in Boston federal court, Young said he would issue an order to prevent the federal government from retaliating against academics who challenged its arrests and deportations of non-citizen, pro-Palestinian activists on college campuses, Reuters wrote.

Tags: , , , , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

A federal appeals court decision discussed the legal process for challenging immigration detentions, with potential consequences for free speech and due process rights of student activists, particularly those involved in pro-Palestinian protests.

Legal process and jurisdiction

The ruling emphasizes the required legal pathways for immigration detainees, determining that immigration courts, not federal district courts, hold primary jurisdiction over such cases, which could affect the appeals process for others in similar circumstances.

Free speech and protest rights

Claims by Khalil and his supporters allege his detention stemmed from participation in pro-Palestinian protests, raising broader concerns regarding government responses to political activism and the protection of dissent in the United States.

Government authority and accountability

Opinions from government and civil liberties organizations, as reported, highlight ongoing debates over how federal authorities interpret their statutory powers related to detention, deportation and the handling of politically sensitive cases.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 144 media outlets

Behind the numbers

Mahmoud Khalil spent 104 days in immigration detention after being arrested on March 8, 2025. The appeals process has postponed his potential re-detention for at least 45 days while legal challenges continue, with multiple court levels involved.

Debunking

There is no public evidence provided by federal officials to substantiate claims that Khalil’s activities were aligned with Hamas. Multiple sources report government officials have accused him but have not charged him with any criminal conduct.

Do the math

Khalil was detained for over three months, missing the birth of his child. The circuit court decision may affect dozens of similar cases of foreign students engaged in campus protests.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don’t just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the court's reversal as "jeopardizing freedom" for a "pro-Palestinian activist," emphasizing a "conservative majority" and a "crackdown on voices.
  • Media outlets in the center remain neutral, detailing Khalil's green card status and the legal rationale without emotional language.
  • Media outlets on the right conversely, hails a "major legal win" for the "Trump administration," often using charged labels like "pro-Hamas" or "anti-Israel Activist" to delegitimize Khalil and justify deportation, portraying the initial release as judicial overreach.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

144 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a ruling that had protected Mahmoud Khalil, allowing for potential re-arrest by federal authorities, according to the court's 2-1 decision.
  • The court ruled that immigration challenges should be handled within the immigration system, not by federal district courts, as stated in their opinion.
  • Khalil's legal team plans to pursue further appeals after the court required him to use immigration courts for his claims.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a federal district court in New Jersey ruling, ordering dismissal of Mahmoud Khalil's habeas petition.
  • Federal law requires deportation challenges to proceed by petition for review, and President Donald Trump's administration appealed the June release order, arguing removal decisions belong to an immigration judge.
  • Some petitioners will have to wait to seek relief, and Khalil's lawyers say they will exhaust all appeals as the case is likely not the final word.
  • Authorities invoked a seldom-used statute permitting expulsion, relying on claims Khalil was "aligned to Hamas" without evidence, while an immigration judge suggested deportation to Algeria or Syria, where Khalil's attorneys warn of mortal danger.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • A federal appeals court ruled that the New Jersey District Court lacked jurisdiction over Mahmoud Khalil's removal proceedings, as it was referred to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
  • The appeals court stated that immigration challenges must be presented through a petition for review, not a lower district court.
  • Khalil faces potential deportation despite the appeals decision not taking immediate effect.
  • Khalil's legal team plans to explore all remaining legal avenues following this ruling.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Daily Newsletter

Start your day with fact-based news

Start your day with fact-based news

Learn more about our emails. Unsubscribe anytime.

By entering your email, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and acknowledge the Privacy Policy.