By Irit Tratt
Thursday, 18 September 2025 12:33 PM EDT
A Louisiana immigration judge has ordered the deportation of pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University graduate student linked to 2024 protests, after he failed to disclose ties to controversial organizations on his green card application. The decision, citing his “beliefs, statements, or associations” as undermining U.S. foreign policy, has drawn sharp criticism from some lawmakers who have engaged with Khalil despite his extremist views.
Khalil, detained in March for endorsing antisemitic activity, was released in June but continued to promote his agenda through interviews and political engagements. His schedule included meetings with liberal politicians such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who greeted him at Newark airport following his release. Khalil also met with Sen. Bernie Sanders, Reps. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Summer Lee, D-Pa., who praised him on social media as a “kind, gentle soul.”
In an interview with New York Times columnist Ezra Klein, Khalil defended the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks in Israel, framing them as necessary to disrupt Israeli-Saudi diplomacy. His rhetoric has resonated with radical figures like NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, who shared a stage with him at a comedy show. Both men are described as part of a broader ideological movement that challenges U.S. values.
Khalil’s presence in the U.S. has been bolstered by his wife, an American citizen, and his ability to cultivate ties with influential figures. He recently received a standing ovation at the pro-terror People’s Conference for Palestine in Michigan, where over 4,500 attendees heard speeches glorifying violence and calling for Israel’s abolition. The event featured Michigan Democratic Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, who delivered a profanity-laced tribute to terrorists.
Critics argue that Khalil’s activities reflect the dangers of lenient immigration policies and radical ideologies. His impending removal is seen as a step toward safeguarding national interests, with opponents insisting he has exploited his U.S. residency to advance an antisemitic agenda. The case underscores tensions over how to balance immigration enforcement with ideological threats.
