News
The U.S. Is Trying to Deport Mahmoud Khalil, a Legal Resident. Here’s What to Know.
The Trump administration invoked an obscure statute over the weekend in moving to deport Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent legal resident of the United States who recently graduated from Columbia University, where he helped lead campus protests against high civilian casualties in Gaza during Israel’s campaign against Hamas.
Mr. Khalil was arrested by immigration officers on Saturday and then sent to a detention center in Louisiana. On Monday, a federal judge in New York, Jesse M. Furman, ordered the federal government not to deport Mr. Khalil while he reviewed a petition challenging the legality of the detention.
Here’s what to know about the administration’s attempt to deport Mr. Khalil.
Who is the Columbia graduate?
Mr. Khalil, 30, earned a master’s degree from Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs in December. He has Palestinian heritage and is married to an American citizen who is eight months pregnant.
At Columbia last spring, Mr. Khali assumed a major role in student-led protests on campus against Israel’s war efforts in Gaza. He described his position as a negotiator and spokesman for Columbia University Apartheid Divest, a pro-Palestinian group.
What’s the legal basis for his arrest?
The Trump administration did not publicly lay out the legal authority for the arrest. But two people with knowledge of the matter, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations, said Secretary of State Marco Rubio relied on a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 that gives him sweeping power to expel foreigners.
The provision says that any “alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States is deportable.”
What is Mr. Khalil being accused of?
That is not very clear.
Mr. Rubio reposted a Homeland Security Department statement that accused Mr. Khalil of having “led activities aligned to Hamas.” But officials have not accused him of having any contact with the terrorist group, taking direction from it or providing material support to it.
Rather, the administration’s rationale is that the protests that Mr. Khalil played a key part in were antisemitic and created a hostile environment for Jewish students at Columbia, the people with knowledge of the matter said. Mr. Rubio’s argument, they said, is that the United States’ foreign policy includes combating antisemitism across the globe and that Mr. Khali’s residency in the nation undermines that policy objective.
Could this happen to more visa or green card holders?
President Trump said Mr. Khalil’s case was “the first arrest of many to come.”
But a lawful permanent resident, or green card holder, is protected by the Constitution, which includes First Amendment free-speech rights and Fifth Amendment due-process rights. The Trump administration’s efforts to deport Mr. Khalil under the I.N.A. provision are likely to face a constitutional challenge, several legal experts said.
What happens next?
There is little precedent for deporting a legal permanent resident based on the provision of the 1952 law that gives the State Secretary a broad power to do so on foreign-policy grounds.
A lawyer for Mr. Khalil, Amy Greer, said her client would “vigorously” challenge the Trump administration’s actions in court. On Monday, Judge Furman, of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, scheduled a hearing for two days later after barring the Trump administration from deporting Mr. Khalil “to preserve the court’s jurisdiction.”
What has President Trump said about pro-Palestinian protesters?
Since 2023, Mr. Trump has repeatedly vowed to revoke visas of international students who participate in pro-Palestinian protests and criticize Israel’s war efforts.
At a rally in Iowa on Oct. 16, 2023, Mr. Trump declared that “in the wake of the attacks on Israel, Americans have been disgusted to see the open support for terrorists among the legions of foreign nationals on college campuses. They’re teaching your children hate.”
He added: “Under the Trump administration, we will revoke the student visas of radical, anti-American and antisemitic foreigners at our colleges and universities, and we will send them straight back home.”
At a speech in Las Vegas on Oct. 28 of that year, Mr. Trump said that “we’ll terminate the visas of all of those Hamas sympathizers, and we’ll get them off our college campuses, out of our cities and get them the hell out of our country.” And at a Nov. 8, 2023, campaign stop in Florida, he said he would “quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism.”
Pentagon officials said on Friday that they were pulling 5,000 troops from Germany and would redeploy them to the United States and other posts overseas.
The Defense Department is also canceling a plan developed under the Biden administration to place a missile-equipped artillery unit in Europe.
The moves will return U.S. forces in Europe to the level they were in 2022, before Russia began its war in Ukraine, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the planning process. Last year, the Pentagon redeployed a brigade in Romania and did not send replacement forces.
Sean Parnell, a Pentagon spokesman, said in a statement that the withdrawal would be completed over the next six to 12 months.
“This decision follows a thorough review of the department’s force posture in Europe and is in recognition of theater requirements and conditions on the ground,” he said.
The Defense Department — particularly during both of President Trump’s terms — has for several years considered decreasing the military presence in Germany. But senior defense officials privately made it clear that they wanted the move to be seen as a punishment for Germany, whose recent comments about the U.S. war in Iran have annoyed Mr. Trump.
Earlier this week, Germany’s chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said Iran had “humiliated” the United States, and he questioned how Mr. Trump planned to end the conflict.
“The Americans obviously have no strategy,” Mr. Merz said.
Mr. Trump then took to Truth Social, his social media site, to vent.
“The United States is studying and reviewing the possible reduction of Troops in Germany, with a determination to be made over the next short period of time,” he wrote on Thursday.
Later, he added: “The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time on ending the war with Russia/Ukraine (Where he has been totally ineffective!), and fixing his broken Country, especially Immigration and Energy, and less time on interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran Nuclear threat, thereby making the World, including Germany, a safer place!”
On Friday, while announcing the decision, a senior Pentagon official said that Germany’s failure to contribute to the Iran war effort had frustrated the United States, and that the country’s rhetoric was inappropriate and unhelpful.
The announcement, and the criticism of Germany, represents a shift for Pentagon officials, who recently had praised Germany’s efforts to increase military spending and take over more of the burden of supporting Ukraine.
Even if the Pentagon pulls 5,000 troops out of Germany, the country would still host the second-largest U.S. troop presence in the world, at more than 30,000, behind only Japan.
Defense officials say the United States depends on its bases in Germany to stage many of its operations in the Middle East, Europe and Africa.
The Iran war has made that clear. Many U.S. troops evacuated from bases in the Middle East that were targeted by Iran were moved to Germany. And many of the U.S. troops wounded in the war have been taken to Germany — to Landstuhl Regional Medical Center near Ramstein Air Base — for treatment.
The U.S. military’s Africa Command and European Command are also headquartered in Germany.
Defense officials said the reduction would not directly affect Landstuhl or other medical facilities in Germany where U.S. troops receive care.
Mifepristone tablets sit on a table at a Planned Parenthood clinic in Ames, Iowa, on July 18, 2024.
Charlie Neibergall/AP
hide caption
toggle caption
Charlie Neibergall/AP
A federal appeals court has restricted access to one of the most common means of abortion in the U.S. by blocking the mailing of mifepristone. A panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is requiring that the abortion pill be distributed only in-person at clinics. Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed enforcement of abortion bans, prescriptions by mail has become a major way that abortions are provided — including to states where bans are in place. The decision sets up a likely appeal to the Supreme Court.
A federal appeals court has restricted access to one of the most common means of abortion in the U.S. by blocking mailing of prescriptions of mifepristone.
A panel of the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is requiring that the abortion pill be distributed only in person at clinics.
“Every abortion facilitated by FDA’s action cancels Louisiana’s ban on medical abortions and undermines its policy that ‘every unborn child is human being from the moment of conception and is, therefore, a legal person,’” the ruling states.
Judges have long deferred to the Food and Drug Administration’s judgments on the safety and appropriate regulation of drugs.
FDA officials under President Donald Trump have repeatedly stated the agency is conducting a new review of mifepristone’s safety, at the direction of the president.
The judges noted in their ruling that FDA “could not say when that review might be complete and admitted it was still collecting data.”
In a court filing, Louisiana’s attorney general and a woman who says she was coerced into taking abortion pills requested that the FDA rules be rolled back to when the pills were allowed to be prescribed and dispensed only in person.
A Louisiana-based federal judge last month ruled that those allowances undermined the state’s abortion ban but stopped short of undoing the regulations immediately.
Since the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling that overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed enforcement of abortion bans, prescriptions by mail have become a major way that abortions are provided — including to states where bans are in place.
“This is going to affect patients’ access to abortion and miscarriage care in every state in the nation,” said Julia Kaye, an ACLU lawyer. “When telemedicine is restricted, rural communities, people with low incomes, people with disabilities, survivors of intimate partner violence and communities of color suffer the most.”
Mifepristone was approved in 2000 as a safe and effective way to end early pregnancies. It is typically used in combination with a second drug, misoprostol.
Because of rare cases of excessive bleeding, the FDA initially imposed strict limits on who could prescribe and distribute the pill — only specially certified physicians and only after an in-person appointment where the person would receive the pill.
Both those requirements were dropped during the COVID-19 years. At the time, FDA officials under President Joe Biden said that after more than 20 years of monitoring mifepristone use, and reviewing dozens of studies involving thousands of women, it was clear that women could safely use the pill without direct supervision.
Friday’s ruling sets up a likely appeal to the Supreme Court.
The conservative-majority high court overturned abortion as a nationwide right in 2022 but unanimously preserved access to mifepristone two years later.
That 2024 decision sidestepped the core issues, however, by ruling that the anti-abortion doctors behind the case didn’t have legal standing to sue.
A federal jury convicted former Representative David Rivera of Florida on Friday, finding him guilty of conspiracy and six other crimes for secretly lobbying officials in Washington on behalf of the Venezuelan government in 2017 and 2018.
Prosecutors presented evidence during the five-week trial in Miami showing that Venezuela’s state-run oil company had secretly hired Mr. Rivera’s consulting firm for $50 million to lobby members of Congress and the White House for a thaw in U.S.-Venezuela relations.
The revelation ran contrary to how Mr. Rivera, a Republican, had portrayed himself in public. He made a political career, first as a state lawmaker and later as a congressman, as a strident anti-Communist. Mr. Rivera served in Congress from 2011 to 2013.
He had previously been the subject of several state and federal investigations into improper campaign dealings. He was also found guilty in the criminal case of failing to register as a foreign agent and money laundering, and faces about 10 years in prison.
His defense lawyers in the criminal case had argued that Mr. Rivera was not working for Nicolás Maduro’s government but rather surreptitiously trying to oust him. They also said that Mr. Rivera did not need to register as a foreign agent because his firm’s contract was with an American company, PDV USA, a U.S. subsidiary of the Venezuelan state-run oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, and not with the state-run company itself.
The 12-member jury also convicted one of Mr. Rivera’s associates, Esther Nuhfer, on four charges. Prosecutors said that Mr. Rivera, 60, split the secret contract earnings, which ultimately amounted to about $20 million after the company terminated the contract, with Ms. Nuhfer and two people who were not charged in the case. Ms. Nuhfer, 52, is a political consultant based in Miami.
Roger Cruz, an assistant U.S. attorney and the lead prosecutor, said in his closing argument on Tuesday that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer decided to keep the contract secret because of “greed.”
“Without their keeping it secret, they would not have got a single penny,” he said. “If anyone found out, their careers would be over.”
The trial drew widespread attention when it began because prosecutors called Secretary of State Marco Rubio to testify against Mr. Rivera, his longtime friend and former housemate in Tallahassee when they both served in the Florida Legislature.
Mr. Rubio, who has not been implicated in any wrongdoing, was a Republican U.S. senator from Florida in the years that Mr. Rivera was secretly lobbying for Venezuela. Mr. Rubio held two meetings with Mr. Rivera at that time and testified in court that he had no idea about Mr. Rivera’s secret contract.
Other prosecution witnesses included Brian Ballard, a major lobbyist and top fund-raiser for President Trump, and Hugo Perera, one of the other two men who admitted to taking part in the conspiracy. Mr. Perera was not charged because he agreed to testify against Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer.
Mr. Perera testified that Mr. Rivera and Ms. Nuhfer had kept the contract secret because they knew it would create a political scandal if it became public. Defense lawyers noted that Mr. Perera, a developer who had served prison time for cocaine trafficking and tax fraud in the 1990s, was allowed to keep the roughly $5 million he made from the Venezuela deal.
One of the defense witnesses was Representative Pete Sessions of Texas, a Republican, who testified that he worked with Mr. Rivera in 2017 to try to persuade Mr. Maduro to step down and hold presidential elections. Mr. Sessions also said that he did not know at the time about Mr. Rivera’s secret Venezuela contract.
Edward R. Shohat, one of Mr. Rivera’s defense lawyers, told jurors in his closing argument that prosecutors had tried to confuse them. “All that he was about was removing Mr. Maduro,” Mr. Shohat said of Mr. Rivera.
David O. Markus, a defense lawyer for Ms. Nuhfer, said she had signed onto the contract “in good faith,” believing it was with a U.S. subsidiary. She would never “in a billion years” have tried to help the Maduro government, Mr. Markus said.
-
Detroit, MI20 minutes agoDetroit getting pro women’s hockey team? What we know about the rumors
-
San Francisco, CA32 minutes agoAfter attempts to report vandalism, San Francisco homeowner gets graffiti notice from city
-
Dallas, TX38 minutes agoCowboys passed on 3 stud prospects in NFL Draft who could make them pay
-
Miami, FL44 minutes agoAdjusted 2026 F1 Miami Grand Prix Sprint starting grid after bizarre penalty
-
Boston, MA50 minutes agoBoston May Fair 2026 opening times as ‘iconic’ attraction returns
-
Denver, CO56 minutes agoAvalanche vs. Wild NHL playoff schedule
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoSporting Kansas City vs Seattle Sounders FC: TV channel, live stream, and kick-off time | Goal.com US
-
San Diego, CA1 hour agoNew audit breaks down the City of San Diego’s response on homeless encampment clean-ups