I heard about this today, things are weird in the US as this guy has a green card but it was being revoked for speech the government didn't like and apparently not anything criminal:
It's questionable whether his green card has actually been revoked either. Supposedly that requires proceedings to go through an immigration court and be approved by a judge, and as far as anyone knows that hasn't happened yet.
Which would mean he's just being detained without cause in some unspecified location on no basis
> It's questionable whether his green card has actually been revoked either. Supposedly that requires proceedings to go through an immigration court and be approved by a judge, and as far as anyone knows that hasn't happened yet.
News coverage seems to suggest immigrants can be detained while moved to revoke their green cards are made, but it’s incredibly troubling that no one seems to know what’s up, the government agents arresting him seemed to think he had a student visa and in general there is so little visibility
You're suggesting there was a previous administration that rounded up lawful permanent residents without court orders on US soil, on the charge that they committed forbidden speech?
oh yes. and he broke a law passed by congress. that makes it even MORE appalling, as all three branches were complicit in an egregious breach of the constitution, not a single one stopped to hold the line
Yes, but FDR's executive order allowed the military to order the exclusion of anyone from any place. The actual thing a person could be arrested for was passed unanimously by Congress to support the EO and enforced by courts. Even during a real national emergency, nobody was disappearing Japanese people without due process. Korematsu was arrested and tried and convicted and their conviction was upheld by courts of appeal and the Supreme Court. At the time FDR, Congress, the Court, and everybody else thought they were doing due process. There's a lot of daylight between that and what Trump is doing.
> Supposedly that requires proceedings to go through an immigration court and be approved by a judge, and as far as anyone knows that hasn't happened yet.
The administration is pretending to goof up following court orders or simply ignoring them, and is lying in court, repeatedly - claiming they "don't know" who is in charge at DOGE.
ICE was arresting people who turned out to be citizens, shuttling them across the country so make it harder for their lawyers to contact them.
Why are you expecting the administration to follow procedures for deporting someone here with a green card?
Hey, the government can decide whether something qualifies as grounds to revoke a green card or not, that's totally legitimate and I support it.
But, once they do, the guy is still entitled to a lawyer. Vanishing the guy and telling the lawyer that they aren't allowed to know where their client is or whether he's still alive is not legitimate.
> Hey, the government can decide whether something qualifies as grounds to revoke a green card or not, that's totally legitimate and I support it.
No, it can't. It must go through a process which affords the green card holder due process. There are specific grounds which are required to be met to remove someone's green card.
And it absolutely cannot be revoked because the government disfavors ones political speech. That's an absolutely fundamental violation of the first amendment and our right to free speech.
It's really not as simple as "hey, the government can decide." To have a green card revoked, the person must be an active member of a group at war with the US or have committed some kind of fraud. DHS must initiate it (not the State Department, despite Rubio's statements), and it must be approved by an immigration judge.
So far all we've heard about this process and the justification is "Contact the White House."
Additionally, here's the AP article that Marco Rubio linked to:
> Greer said she spoke by phone with one of the ICE agents during the arrest, who said they were acting on State Department orders to revoke Khalil’s student visa. Informed by the attorney that Khalil was in the United States as a permanent resident with a green card, *the agent said they were revoking that too*, according to the lawyer.
> The student, Mahmoud Khalil at the university's School of International and Public Affairs, was arrested by U.S. Department of Homeland Security agents at his university residence on Saturday, the Student Workers of Columbia union said in a statement. His wife is an American citizen, eight months pregnant, according to news reports, and he holds a U.S. permanent residency green card, the union said.
> Secretary of State Marco Rubio shared a link on X to a news article about Mr. Khalil’s arrest and issued a broad promise: “We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported.”
I don't consider twitter posts as anything more than the ramblings of the deranged, and don't really see a twitter post as evidence that someone already got deported considering how much politicians lie on there.
There is evidence that the group that Khalil headed did endorse Hamas and distributed pro-Hamas propaganda. Whether this news article is true or if it's propaganda remains to be seen.
"He has remained active in recent disruptive protests, including last week’s takeover of the Milstein Library at Barnard College. Videos and photographs posted on X depict him holding a bullhorn near the library entrance and engaged in discussion with school administrators.
That protest featured violent propaganda flyers that purportedly came directly from the “Hamas Media Office,” including one pamphlet titled “Our Narrative… Operation Al-Aqsa Flood,” which justified the Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel that killed 1,200 people — and in which women were repeatedly raped, whole families were executed and 251 hostages were taken to the Gaza Strip.
Others at the Barnard library takeover passed around trading card-like photos of notorious Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed by an Israeli airstrike in Lebanon last September."
"Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents aided a Columbia -owned apartment inhabited by Mahmoud Khalil, who fronts a radical group, Columbia United Apartheid Divest (CUAD), which sympathizes with terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah and calls for the “end of Western Civilization.”"
Whether or not this is true, I can't say at this point or if this is just propaganda. But at the very least it does say that his group sympathizes with terror groups and if that's true, then it makes him eligible for deportation.
Huh? This just reinforces what I said. He isn’t accused of distributing pro-Hams propaganda or saying he supports them. At best you have unsubstantiated claims on X that someone distributed some images at an event he was also at. That isn’t very conclusive and likely won’t hold up in a normal court of law.
He is the leader of a group that is being accused of endorsing Hamas and distributing pro-Hamas literature. If true, then him being the leader absolutely means he is responsible and should be held responsible. Unless you don't think that Trump should be held responsible for the actions of Musk.
Obviously a newspaper article isn't enough evidence and even the veracity of the article remains in question, the assumption is that there will be actual evidence. If true, he should be deported. If false, then he deserves to go free. It's pretty cut and dry.
I don’t think the article even was so bold as to say his organization distributed pro Hamas flyer. They say someone at the protest did and leave it to your inference that it was the org he leads
> He’s been a regular fixture on news programs discussing the group’s disruptive efforts, including an interview on Quds News Network done completely in Arabic
Why is it relevant that he did an interview in Arabic? Like seriously?
As others have said the rest reads as just guilt by association.
To be maximally fair to the other position it has made me reluctant to protest against Israel despite being broadly against them. There are too many people in that movement who are clearly racist, but it’s also unfortunate that pro Israeli forces campaign hard to conflate opposition to Israel with opposition to Jewish people
Ah, neat, so if the government decides it disfavors your speech it just has to say "that speech supports a terrorist organization", and it can deport anyone it wants first amendment be damned?
The government has no obligation to allow any and all non-citizens who seek to immigrate to the US. If the immigrant is engaging in unfavorable or distasteful activities, the government certainly has the right to not allow them to enter the country or become citizens. It's not just for endorsing terrorism, if any immigrant commits a heinous crime, then can and will also be deported, so it makes sense to me.
A permanent resident is not someone who is seeking to immigrate to the US. They have already immigrated. That's what permanent residency status is, and that's why there's a much higher bar for the removal of permanent residency than there is for a visa, or the *application* for a permanent residency.
The government can have wide latitude in who it chooses to grant permanent residency to. It cannot, however, flippantly revoke that status (and especially not over disfavored speech)
To think it should be allowed to do so is to either fundamentally misunderstand what a "permanent resident" is, or to callous disregard all of our first amendment rights.
You are wrong. I'm someone who immigrated to the US so I'm deeply aware of the situation.
Permanent resident isn't the same as a citizen. Until you become a citizen there are still limitations to the things you can do, for example vote, go on a jury, etc. And you can lose your PR if you stay out of the US too long or if you commit certain crimes. And endorsing terrorism absolutely can get you stripped of your PR.
Once you are a naturalized citizen, then the bar for losing your citizenship is much higher, usually you need to have lied during the immigration application. But even commiting an especially heinous crime won't get your stripped of your citizenship.
I'd heard from sources I consider reputable that all allegations of physically blocking doorways were made up and the protestors remained outdoors and that furthermore, the Israeli students perceived the existence of the Palestinian flag in their line of sight, anywhere, ever, to constitute intimidation and discrimination regardless of the context.
What are some good sources to reconcile your claims with these other claims and find out the truth?
> Pro-Palestinian student protesters at Columbia University early Tuesday charged the same campus building that students advocating for racial justice occupied in the 1960s, a significant escalation at the elite institution that launched dozens of campus demonstrations across the world.
> “We will not leave until Columbia meets every one of our demands,” one of the students yelled from a balcony window. The demands include university divestment from Israel, disclosure of Columbia investments and protections for protesters.
I'm curious what you think your sources say? You originally claimed that this protest leader participated in the act of selectively denying access to campus facilities for Jewish people. That Politico article does not support your claim.
I did not claim that he directly participated in that. If you simply google his name, in every article the word 'leader' is used to describe him in relation to the Columbia protests, protests which did include such acts.
He was a leader of protests at Columbia which involved physically blocking Jewish students from entering classes and other forms of overt discrimination and intimidation directed at Jewish and Israeli students.
That he was a leader of protests at Columbia? That the protests involved physically blocking Jewish students? That the protests involved intimidation directed at Jewish and Israeli students?
It was a full sentence. Try backing it up with facts. This shouldn't take a 7 comment deep thread to handle, unless maybe you are full of shit and want to bury that fact with some of your bullshit.
You are trolling or I suppose you are just upset that your guy is being deported. If there's something specific you want me to find a source for, let me know.
I'm trolling? For asking you to source one claim? This is the sixth time you've been asked to provide sources. Two people have asked. Your unsourced comment is flagged. The one source you provided does not match your claims afaict.
You can find many other mainstream sources calling him a "leader" by simply doing a Google News search for the term "Mahmoud Khalil leader".
This is something you could have taken 2 seconds to Google. This is why you're trolling and acting in bad faith. Regardless of our discussions here, Mahmoud is being deported and many more are to come according to statement put out by the White House.
I appreciate the source and I'll get back to you with a detailed reply of my own once I've finished reading it and searching for corroborating details on the people who were there. Watch this space.
I would encourage you to think more critically. If you organized a peaceful protest should you be held liable for other peoples actions? He was apparently deported for speech, not violence according to the parent comment.
I have no idea if there's footage of him personally doing such things, but he's a leader of the protests, and one of the people negotiating on behalf of the other protesters with the university. He is most definitely taking part in occupying part of campus illegally, so his ass should be deported.
> There's no issue with deporting someone like that and it is within the government's power to do so.
I feel like I know the answer to this but do you also believe we should just deport everyone that commits any crime irrespective of whether it's a misdemeanor or felony?
Non-citizens should not be participating in or fomenting political protests, especially ones that involve harassment, intimidation, destruction of private property, occupations of buildings, (all of which occurred throughout the Columbia protests).
If you are talking about deporting someone for getting a speeding ticket, that would be pretty draconian unless it was something very dangerous like doing 25 over in a school zone during school hours, etc.
> If you are talking about deporting someone for getting a speeding ticket, that would be pretty draconian unless it was something very dangerous like doing 25 over in a school zone during school hours, etc.
Lol sure ya let's deport people for speeding in a school zone. Forget due process or the justice system at all for these heathens nah just ship them off immediately. Like are these real words that reflect you're serious adult position on this? Do you really not have any sense that what you're saying is insane?
For felonies, absolutely. For felonies and misdemeanors in the furtherance of political goals (as is the case here), absolutely. Otherwise you leave yourself wide open to political interference by foreign nations on your own soil.
The mistake that every single person makes that advocates for extreme measures is they assume the arbiter of those measures will always be on their side. Historically it's literally never been the case but who knows maybe you'll be part of the first group to always be in the good graces of dear leader. I wish you good luck!
Deporting foreign political agents isn't extreme though, it's been standard practice worldwide for thousands of years. It's actually less extreme than what has been practiced in many locales for dealing with foreign agents: torture, summary execution, etc.
There's been a concerted effort to frame any support for the people of Palestine as support for Hamas, and any criticism of Israeli policy as anti-semitism. It's not even uncommon to see it on Hacker News.
The content of this article is in stark contrast to the information I'm seeing from other posters as well as relatively non-partisan sources such as the BBC and Wikipedia. I've done some preliminary fact-checking to try and gauge how much I trust it. Other HN users may find this helpful.
Media Bias Fact Check report on True North:
> These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports, and omit information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
The linked article hinges entirely on the content of a few tweets by twitter user @l3v1at4an (https://x.com/l3v1at4an). The twitter user almost exclusively posts about Palestine, Hamas and Hezbullah, with a distinct anti-Islamic and pro-Jewish slant. The subtitles in the videos are translated from arabic and supplied by this twitter user.
Googling for 'Mahmoud Khalil "repeat the strike"' or 'Mahmoud Khalil "kidnap the soldiers"' produces only the True North article as a result.
The above is enough to raise suspicions about the translation quality in the video. Would be great if someone with better knowledge of Arabic was able to verify or refute the translated subtitles.
What do you call what's being done to him if not imprisonment? What are "migrant privileges"?
If expressing sympathy for a group disliked by the politicians currently in power makes people a "national security threat" there are tens of millions of national security threats in this country, many of them citizens, and they all apparently deserve to disappear like this guy has?
Citizens cannot be deported. In general, if you are a migrant to a country, you are a guest until you become a citizen. This is not rocket science. My own family went through this process.
If an American citizen is being jailed for speaking in favor of Hamas, we can have a conversation.
The brain gymnastics of Trump supporters arr absolutely amazing, one hand they could stop shouting freedom of speech everytime someone (a private entity) didn't allow them to spew racism on their platform, on the other hand deporting (the government) someone for their political views is fine because they are a security threat and deportation isn't really punishment (being banned on a social media platform on the other hand...).
At least be honest and say "I don't care because it's speech I disagree with"
I saw this comment on Bluesky yesterday, and it really resonated with me after watching a "totally moderate" conservative friend incrementally tolerate more and more obviously evil things:
> A conservative will pretend to believe whatever they think is necessary to get to their only goal: hurting you. That is the sum total of how they function. Pretending they have morals, ethics, or beliefs actively plays into their hands.
"Owning the libs" is pretty much the only thing needed to unite them.
https://x.com/TheFIREorg/status/1898841858983239814
More details: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-authorities-arrest-pales... and https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/3/9/mahmoud-khalil-stude... (This last article mentions his green card apparently being revoked.)