U.S. judge orders deportation of Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil to Algeria or Syria

A U.S. immigration judge has ordered the deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian-descended activist who rose to prominence during 2024 Gaza-related protests at Columbia University, to Algeria or Syria after finding that he wilfully misrepresented material facts on his green-card application.

Judge Jamee Comans, who sits in Louisiana, said Khalil acted “for the sole purpose of circumventing the immigration process.” The decision adds a new legal chapter to a yearslong case that had already seen Khalil detained for months and subject to ongoing federal court orders restricting deportation or detention in related proceedings. Khalil’s lawyers said they intend to appeal the ruling, and noted that other federal orders remain in effect that limit the government’s ability to remove or detain him while the case moves forward.

Khalil, 30, a permanent U.S. resident of Palestinian descent, was a visible figure during the 2024 Gaza war protests at Columbia University, where he studied and later became a spokesperson for protesters who pursued concessions from university leadership and calls for broader divestment and a ceasefire. His role and the nature of his involvement have drawn praise from some activists and criticism from others who accused him of leading or coordinating college-campus groups.

The decision comes after a period of government action against Khalil and several other protesters amid a broader crackdown on university campuses the government has said failed to address antisemitism amid the Gaza-related conflict. In March, Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials detained Khalil as part of those efforts. He had previously been held in an immigration facility in Louisiana for about three months before a federal judge ruled that he was neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community. On June 20, the judge ordered his release, though that order did not alter the deportation ruling issued by Comans.

During the time Khalil was detained, his wife, who is a U.S. citizen, gave birth to their son, a moment that underscored the personal stakes for Khalil and his family. The government’s assertions of misrepresentation have cited omissions in Khalil’s green-card filings, including details of his past associations with UNWRA and what the government described as “continuing employment” at the British Embassy in Beirut.

In March, prosecutors argued that Khalil left out crucial information on his immigration forms, a claim that the government said undermined the integrity of the process and could have affected his eligibility for permanent-resident status. Khalil’s supporters have dismissed the allegations as mischaracterizations used to undermine his activism and speech.

Responding to the ruling, Khalil told the Associated Press that the decision was part of a broader pattern of retaliation against him for exercising his free speech rights. “It is no surprise that the Trump administration continues to retaliate against me for my exercise of free speech,” he said.

Khalil’s lawyers have filed a separate claim seeking damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution, arguing that his detention and the public portrayal of him as an extremist were unjust. They filed the $20 million claim in June and said the suit would proceed in federal court even as the deportation order stands.

The deportation order has drawn attention not only for its potential human impact but also for the political rhetoric surrounding campus activism and the administration’s stance on individuals it labels as anti-Israel or pro-Palestinian. President Donald Trump has repeatedly contended that pro-Palestinian activists, including Khalil, support Hamas and should be deported; he has described arrests of protesters as “the first of many to come.” Khalil’s supporters say his work as a mediator between Columbia officials and student activists helped shape the dialogue around protests and policy.

In public statements and interviews, Khalil has maintained that his role at Columbia was not as a leader of a formal organization but as a spokesperson for the protesters and as a mediator with the administration. Activists who supported him described him as a central figure in the campus demonstrations, while those who opposed his stance argued that his influence extended beyond that of a typical student advocate. The Columbia dispute later centered on the broader issue of how universities address antisemitism claims while supporting free expression and peaceful protest.

The government’s allegations regarding Khalil’s past affiliations and employment have remained a central point of contention.UNWRA, the UN agency that assists Palestinian refugees in the region, and Khalil’s supposed ties to the British Embassy in Beirut were cited as omissions that the government argued rendered him ineligible for residency. Khalil’s legal team has disputed the interpretation of his past associations and argued that the omissions were not material to his residency application and did not reflect any wrongdoing.

As the legal process advances, Khalil’s case continues to intersect with broader debates about immigration policy, campus activism, and the administration’s approach to individuals who speak out on Middle East conflicts. The outcome of the appeal process, along with any related civil litigation, will shape how similar cases are handled in the coming months and how campuses navigate free speech versus concerns about discrimination and harassment.

The case also underscores the complex personal dimension of immigration policy. Khalil’s family life, including the birth of his son during his detention, has highlighted the human consequences of deportation orders, even when other courts have previously blocked removal or detention in related matters. The next steps include the appellate review of Comans’ decision, potential stays on deportation, and any related civil actions that may influence or delay enforcement.

As international and domestic observers monitor the case, the broader narrative remains focused on how immigration courts balance national security concerns with individual rights and the rights of people who mobilize around controversial political issues. The final trajectory of Khalil’s status in the United States will depend on the outcome of the appeal, the resolution of any civil actions, and possible governing policy shifts at the federal level.