NEW YORK (WABC) -- The arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate, has ignited widespread protests across New York City, raising significant concerns about free speech and immigration policies during the Trump administration. Khalil, known for leading demonstrations against Israel's military actions in Gaza last year, was taken by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from his apartment on March 8, 2025, and is currently detained at a facility in Jena, Louisiana.
On March 12, 2025, a federal judge is set to hold a hearing to determine the legality of Khalil’s arrest and whether he should face deportation, though the administration has accused him of supporting terrorism without charges. The White House criticized Columbia University for allegedly refusing to cooperate with Homeland Security investigations, which has exacerbated tensions surrounding Khalil's detention. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed Columbia failed to assist federal authorities, stating, "Columbia University is refusing to help the Department of Homeland Security in identifying individuals on campus who have engaged in pro-Hamas activity." Last week, President Donald Trump escalated his attack, cutting $400 million from financial assistance for the university.
Khalil, who holds a green card and is married to an American citizen who is eight months pregnant, has garnered support from many who see his arrest as part of the government’s crackdown on dissenting voices. Just prior to his arrest, Khalil allegedly reached out to Columbia University for legal assistance, fearing he might be targeted by ICE, but received no response.
His detention has sparked protests throughout New York, manifesting not only outside Columbia’s campus but also along city streets, where activists have voiced their demands for justice. Indigenous American perspectives on Khalil highlight the fears surrounding the political climate, where freedom of speech is perceived to be increasingly under siege. Demonstrators have noted feeling unsafe engaging with Khalil’s activism, reflecting the complex dynamics at play.
Many Jewish students and faculty have expressed feeling threatened by Khalil’s protests, recalling numerous instances of antisemitic rhetoric during demonstrations. Sam Nahins, a Columbia student, stated, "We've had fliers tossed around glorifying October 7th...there are students who are reporting other students to ICE because there's been a lack of action on Columbia's part." These sentiments expose the deeply divided opinions surrounding Khalil's activism and the larger campus climate.
Commentators have weighed the legal justifications for Khalil's arrest against the broader political backdrop, asserting his right to free speech. Prominent civil rights advocates argue his detention symbolizes a dangerous attack on the rights of immigrants and activists. Attorney Amy Greer remarked, "He was chosen as an example to stifle entirely lawful dissent, in violation of the First Amendment." Khalil’s situation has drawn the attention of over 1.7 million petitioners urging for his release, with thousands participating in demonstrations affirming the importance of civil liberties.
The Trump administration has labeled Khalil as potentially linked with Hamas, yet his legal representatives have strongly challenged these allegations. Despite no criminal charges being filed against him, officials assert he has violated U.S. immigration laws based on his political activities. This raises pressing questions on the interpretation of free speech rights related to activism and dissent.
“It’s clear the goal is to intimidate pro-Palestinian activists under the guise of national security,” said Maryan Alwan, a Columbia University student and peer of Khalil who called for unity among students who support free speech. “If we do not stand up for one another, it brings real danger to our campus.” Demonstrations continue to occur as activists rally for Khalil, asserting his advocacy aligns with broader movements for social justice.
Meanwhile, the upcoming court ruling on March 12 will be pivotal. Federal Judge Jesse M. Furman has temporarily halted deportation proceedings, citing the necessity of reviewing Khalil’s case. The outcome may establish precedents for how free speech and activism intersect with immigration policy. Legal experts note challenges to Khalil’s arrest could engender broader discussions about the rights of permanent residents involved in protests.
Khalil’s case highlights the tensions surrounding immigration enforcement, particularly how it may intersect with political expression. Following previous actions against pro-Palestinian sentiments on campuses, today's environment appears reflective of heightened national scrutiny toward dissenting voices connected to foreign policy debates.
Those supporting Khalil argue the government’s actions reflect ideological motivations more than adherence to law. They view the situation as emblematic of the broader efforts against dissent highlighted by the administration's stance on immigration reform. Critics warn this could set concerning precedents for future actions against students and activists who speak out against U.S. policies.
Calls for Khalil's release align with growing demands for reform of restrictive immigration practices seen as politically motivated and detrimental to civil liberties. Organizers are urging continued activism to safeguard individual rights, fearing the ramifications could extend beyond Khalil, affecting numerous other students and immigrants.
This moment could reshape the narrative around immigration enforcement as it relates to activism, potentially redefining the balance between national security and the protection of constitutional rights.