Power Grab/Fire anyone who can stop him
ICE arrests green-card holder Mahmoud Khalil over his campus protest role and holds him for 104 days
Khalil, a Columbia graduate and lawful permanent resident, had been a lead negotiator for pro-Palestinian protesters. He has not been charged with a crime.
What happened
On March 8, 2025, plainclothes ICE agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a lawful permanent resident, at his New York apartment building. Secretary of State Marco Rubio invoked a rarely used provision declaring his presence carried “potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.” Khalil was moved to Louisiana.
Khalil was held 104 days, until a federal judge in New Jersey ordered him released on bail on June 20, 2025. The judge found the government’s theory likely unconstitutional. The government then argued that Khalil had omitted information on his green card application.
On January 15, 2026, a divided Third Circuit panel held that the district court lacked jurisdiction until immigration proceedings finish. The vote was 2–1. Khalil sought rehearing and Supreme Court review. Until then, federal courts cannot hear his claims, which leaves him exposed to re-detention.
Who benefited
The administration established that a lawful permanent resident could be arrested and held for months on the Secretary of State’s say-so, before any court tested the theory. Rubio gained a working precedent for using the foreign-policy provision against campus speech.
Who wanted something
Rubio signed the determination that Khalil’s presence carried foreign policy consequences. The arrest was the opening move of a White House campaign against pro-Palestinian activists on visas and green cards, carried out by ICE and defended by the Justice Department. When the first theory faltered in court, the department switched to the green card omission.
Who lost out
Khalil spent 104 days in detention, missed the birth of his son, and has still been charged with no crime. He cannot be sure he will not be detained again. Every noncitizen in the United States now has reason to weigh political speech against the risk of removal.
Why it matters
Whether the First Amendment protects a noncitizen’s speech when the executive calls it a foreign policy problem is still unanswered. A district judge found the theory likely unconstitutional. The Third Circuit’s ruling means the question may wait until Khalil has been run through the immigration system the government controls.
Sources NPRACLU (primary)Wikipedia