Judge Orders Mahmoud Khalil Deported to Algeria or Syria for Lying on Immigration Form

A federal judge has ruled that pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, who played a prominent role in the radical demonstrations at Columbia University, must be deported — either to Algeria or to his native Syria. The decision is a significant moment in the ongoing debate over how the United States should handle foreign nationals who exploit America’s freedoms while undermining its institutions.

Khalil’s case has been watched closely for months. He was arrested in early March by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the Trump administration made it clear from the outset that it intended to remove him from the country. Although Khalil had been granted legal permanent resident status, he never became a U.S. citizen. That distinction matters. Permanent residency is not a blank check, and the system was designed to ensure that individuals who fail to live up to their obligations can be held accountable.

The decision also ties back to a central campaign promise made by Donald Trump. During the 2024 election, he vowed that foreign activists who fueled the antisemitic encampments that swept college campuses would face deportation. These encampments disrupted universities, intimidated Jewish students, and often promoted openly hostile rhetoric against America’s closest ally in the Middle East. For many Americans, the promise to restore order and reassert the rule of law was common sense. Khalil’s arrest was one step toward delivering on that commitment.

The administration did not shy away from the rationale. As Secretary of State Marco Rubio put it: “We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported.” That message reflected a broader principle: while America has always welcomed immigrants, it also has the right — and the responsibility — to ensure its generosity is not abused by individuals who champion movements hostile to our values and allies.

Khalil, unsurprisingly, became a cause for the left. Advocacy groups rallied to his defense, casting him as a victim rather than acknowledging the clear terms of his status as a non-citizen. He was briefly released while his case moved forward, and he even filed a $20 million lawsuit against the administration, portraying enforcement of immigration law as political retaliation. That narrative may have played well in activist circles, but it did little to change the underlying facts of his situation.

The latest ruling underscores those facts. As reported in court filings, “An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application, according to documents filed in federal court Wednesday by his lawyers.” In other words, the deportation order stems not only from his activism but also from dishonesty on his immigration paperwork. That dishonesty alone would be sufficient grounds for removal.

Khalil’s attorneys signaled they plan to appeal, but even they admitted in filings that the appeals process will likely move quickly and not in his favor. The judge in this case, Jamee Comans, issued her decision despite another court order in New Jersey temporarily blocking deportation while separate legal questions are considered. Still, the momentum appears firmly against Khalil.

This development highlights an important principle: America’s immigration system, though often weakened by bureaucratic overreach and political grandstanding, remains grounded in the idea that citizenship is a privilege to be earned, not an entitlement to be exploited. When individuals abuse that privilege, especially while sowing division and hostility on U.S. soil, the government not only has the authority but the duty to act.

The Khalil case is a reminder of what is at stake. The freedoms enjoyed on American campuses are not supposed to be a stage for foreign activists to champion radical causes while disregarding the responsibilities that come with residency. Limited government works best when rules are clear, accountability is consistent, and taxpayer resources are not drained fighting frivolous lawsuits designed to shield lawbreakers. Deportation in this case is not retaliation; it is the straightforward application of laws meant to protect both national security and the integrity of America’s institutions.