Mahmoud Khalil reportedly led and helped organize the campaign of terror on Columbia University’s campus, which involved building takeovers and destruction, intimidation, blockades, and other assaults on the rights of others, particularly Israeli and pro-Israel students and faculty. ICE took him into custody and reportedly is planning to deport him despite him having a green card.
We don’t yet fully know what the legal argument will be by the government, but it probably is as laid out by Will Chamberlain linking to an X post by Joel Petlin:
“This is actually the cleanest rationale for deporting Khalil. He put himself forward as a spokesman for Columbia University Apartheid Divest. That organization repeatedly endorsed/espoused terrorist activity as defined under the statute. The end. He can go home.”
I had a chance to speak to Tony Katz today about it, and was very cautious given that we don’t know all the facts and legal theories yet. What I did reject is the notion being spun by those glorifying Khalil that he is a free speech victim.
WAJ (07:40):Well, I think you have to distinguish, immigration is a very different situation than someone who’s a US citizen. The government can’t deport, to my knowledge, a US citizen. They can either prosecute you for a crime or they have to leave you alone pretty much. But when you’re here on an immigration, whether it’s a visa or a green card, you’re playing by a different set of rules. You have no right to be here unless you comply with the rules, unlike US citizens. And so it’s a very different situation, and I think the government does have a key role there. It does have an interest and a right to keep people out who give support for terrorism. It’s right in the statute … whether this person did or not is something they’ll have to prove, whether they engage in criminal activity while here, is something they’re going to have to prove.But if they can prove all of those things, there’s no reason why we as a country need to let in people who come here for the very purpose of not only advocating the overthrow of the US government, not only advocating the destruction of our society, but engaging in organizing violent conduct, harassing conduct.Remember this guy deprived hundreds, if not thousands, of Columbia students of their rights. He deprived them of their right to education. He deprived them of their right to speech through these crazy, violent, intimidating marches that they did, and checkpoints and not allowing students to get to class.This is not a guy who has respected anybody else’s rights, yet we as a country will respect his rights to the extent he has them.This is not a free speech issue. If you were going to prove, as they claim, that he’s only being prosecuted because he’s quote unquote pro-Palestinian, then you would have to find similar conduct by a pro-Israel student, which is not prosecuted. The problem with these free speech arguments by the anti-Israel crowd is they are the only ones taking over buildings. They are the only ones trashing buildings. They are the only ones intimidating staff.So it’s not equal. Don’t tell me that he’s being persecuted for Palestinian views because Israelis are not doing this on campuses….WAJ (10:07):… Look at all the things they’re saying. They’re saying he is being persecuted, because of his pro-Palestinian views. And I’m saying that if you’re going to make that argument, you have to point to a similar circumstance where a pro-Israel student engaged in similar conduct and was not prosecuted or not deported, or an Israeli student was not deported. And they can’t do that because the only people trashing the campus, the only people intimidating other people on the campuses. The only people setting up checkpoints on campuses and declaring Zionist free zones like happened at UCLA, are the so-called pro-Palestinian crowd.They are being held accountable because they’re the only ones engaging in this conduct. It has nothing to do with free speech. And it’s unfortunate that a bunch of organizations are rallying around him on the free speech issue when that’s not the question….WAJ (11:49):…. If you’re blocking somebody from entering a building, that’s not free speech. If you are taking over a building and trashing it, that’s not free speech. So those things are not protected. And to the extent he or anybody else engaged in those, they are not protected. Now, if you’re a US citizen, you’re either charged criminally or you’re left alone. But if you’re here on a visa or a green card, there’s one more remedy there, and that’s to kick you out of the country for that sort of conduct… I don’t know if that’s what the government’s going to base it on, but there also is federal law that would apply, or at least it’s been cited by a lot of people that would apply even to green card holders that expressing support for terrorism.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY