Trump & Rubio Named in Lawsuit by Anti-Israel Activist Mahmoud Khalil Over Alleged ‘Retaliatory Detention’
Edited by: Fern Sidman
In a bold legal escalation, anti-Israel activist Mahmoud Khalil has formally amended his federal lawsuit to include President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio as central figures in what he claims is a politically charged campaign of repression against pro-Palestinian advocacy, as was reported by The New York Post late on Thursday. The updated legal filing, submitted Thursday night in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, accuses senior Trump administration officials of weaponizing immigration law to silence dissent and punish protected political speech.
According to the information provided in The New York Post report, Khalil alleged that he is being subjected to “targeted” and “retaliatory detention” designed not only to stifle his own activism, but also to serve as a chilling warning to other individuals in the United States who express support for Palestinian causes. The amended 33-page petition portrays Khalil’s detention as emblematic of what his attorneys describe as a larger “hostile campaign” by the Trump administration against pro-Palestinian students, organizers, and noncitizens.
The lawsuit specifically emphasizes Khalil’s prominent role as a campus activist at Columbia University. As The Post report detailed, Khalil has been an active figure in protests against Israel’s military actions in Gaza, serving not only as a demonstrator but, at times, as the symbolic face of the student-led movement. Over the past 18 months, his advocacy has brought heightened attention to Columbia’s protests — and, by extension, into the crosshairs of federal immigration authorities.
“The Trump administration has made no secret of its opposition to those protests and has repeatedly threatened to weaponize immigration law to punish noncitizens who have participated,” the legal filing declared, as quoted by The Post.
Attorneys for Khalil argued that the rationale being used to pursue his removal from the country is unprecedented and fundamentally political. The Post reported that the legal challenge notes that the specific grounds for deportation cited by immigration officials have rarely — if ever — been applied in this manner. Typically, they argue, these statutes are reserved for high-profile cases involving senior government figures or individuals accused of terrorism-related offenses in their countries of origin.
“It does not appear to have ever been applied to any person for engaging in First Amendment protected speech,” the lawsuit asserts, according to the report in The Post. Khalil’s legal team warned that such a use of immigration law sets a dangerous precedent, threatening the constitutional rights of anyone whose political speech runs counter to the preferences of those in power.
By naming Trump and Rubio directly in the suit, Khalil is significantly raising the political stakes surrounding his detention. The move also marks an unusual legal strategy: suing former top U.S. government officials personally for actions taken under the umbrella of national immigration enforcement.
The complaint seeks to demonstrate that the detention and threatened deportation of Khalil are not legitimate exercises of state authority, but rather the manifestation of an ideologically driven crackdown, as per the information in The Post report. The lawsuit claimed these actions were taken not out of legal necessity, but out of a desire to suppress voices critical of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, particularly those sympathetic to Palestinians.
Khalil’s attorneys also argued that the timing of the legal actions against him — coinciding with his rise as a public face of the campus protest movement — is no coincidence. They allege that his case illustrates how immigration law is being used not merely for enforcement, but as an instrument of political punishment.
While the Trump administration and its supporters have consistently defended a hardline stance on immigration and foreign policy, the allegations raised in Khalil’s case — as highlighted by the report in The Post — calls attention to the extent to which domestic dissent and international advocacy are becoming increasingly entangled in the United States’ legal and political arenas.
As this high-profile legal challenge moves forward, it is expected to provoke heated debate over the limits of executive power, the constitutional protections afforded to noncitizens, and the role of political ideology in immigration enforcement. Whatever the eventual outcome, Mahmoud Khalil’s lawsuit — and the explosive accusations within it — is poised to become a flashpoint in the broader struggle over civil liberties and the future of dissent in America.
(AP) — Regular-season champs. A tournament title. Pride in the program fully restored. The pied…
By World Israel News Staff Far-left MK Yair Golan of the Democrats party has slammed…
By Jonathan S. Tobin, JNS In demonstrations at Columbia University and Trump Tower in New…
By Daniel Greenfield (Front Page Magazine) “They patrol L.A.’s streets in search of ICE, Trump…
(AP) — A delivery driver has won $50 million in a lawsuit after being seriously…
(AP) — Police in New York City are searching for a person they say set…
View Comments
I am all for free-speech, however if someone utilizes it to promote violence, hate, and preventing one group of students who are there to learn just because of their Religious beliefs should not be allowed. These demonstrations led to students being victimized because of their religious beliefs and not about the Palestinian cause. Sorry but he should be sent to Palestine and any of his followers should follow him. He supports Terrorism.