In Newark, New Jersey, a recent court filing revealed the federal government defending Mahmoud Khalil’s warrantless arrest due to concerns he might flee, supported by his own remarks about leaving the scene. Khalil, a student activist from Columbia University, has been held in a detention facility in Jena, Louisiana, for over six weeks.
The legal documents were submitted in a Newark federal court, where a Department of Homeland Security lawyer argued that surveillance agents on March 8 had received instructions that Khalil could potentially be expelled from the United States, as his activities or presence might severely affect U.S. foreign policy. During the surveillance, when a Homeland Security Investigations agent approached Khalil and identified himself, Khalil was walking along with his wife. As the situation unfolded, his wife reportedly went to get documents confirming his legal residence status.
Allegedly, the agent asked Khalil to cooperate while his identity was being verified. However, Khalil allegedly stated his unwillingness to cooperate and signaled an intention to leave the area. This prompted the supervising Homeland Security agent to view him as a potential flight risk, thus deeming arrest necessary.
However, the narrative presented by the government has been challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union and Khalil’s legal team. They argue that the claim of a possible flight risk is misleading, referencing the arrest footage captured by Khalil’s wife and past statements about the incident. Khalil’s lawyer, Marc Van Der Hout, noted in a press release that agents initially claimed there was an arrest warrant when, in fact, they were operating without one, a fact only disclosed recently in the government’s legal submissions.
“The government’s acknowledgment is shocking,” Van Der Hout commented, saying that it was appalling for officials to assert in their initial report that there was an arrest warrant when there was not. This, he argued, represents a severe breach by the Department of Homeland Security and should lead to the dismissal of proceedings. He expressed hope for such a decision from the immigration court.
Another lawyer, Amy Greer, who was on the phone with Khalil during the arrest, remarked on his composed demeanor despite agents not providing an arrest warrant. “We now understand why they failed to show Mahmoud the warrant — because there wasn’t one,” she said. Greer characterized the situation as yet another attempt by the administration to rationalize its illegal detention of Khalil, whom she now refers to as a political prisoner by the government’s implicit admission.
As a permanent resident and graduate student, Khalil has played a significant role in discussions at Columbia University, particularly during demonstrations critiquing Israel’s policies regarding Palestinians and its military actions in Gaza. He was apprehended in the lobby of his apartment in Manhattan on March 8, marking the first such arrest tied to President Trump’s initiative targeting pro-Palestinian activists.
The administration has not charged Khalil with any criminal activity but has advocated for his expulsion due to his political views. Recently, an immigration judge in Louisiana ruled that the government’s claim that Khalil’s presence posed “potentially serious foreign policy consequences” justified the requirements necessary for deportation.