In brief
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Mahmoud Khalil's habeas petition, determining that immigration law requires deportation challenges to be filed in federal appeals courts. The ruling signals a significant gain for the Trump administration's campaign to detain noncitizens protesting against Israel. Khalil's legal team plans to pursue further appeals, arguing that his arrest and detention are influenced by his pro-Palestinian activism.
A federal appeals panel on Thursday reversed a lower court decision that had previously released former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil from an immigration jail, edging the government closer to detaining and potentially deporting the Palestinian activist.
A three-judge panel from the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia ruled that the lower court in New Jersey lacked jurisdiction over the matter since federal immigration challenges are required to be addressed at the appeals court level, rather than through habeas petitions.
In a split decision, the panel outlined that federal immigration laws mandate deportation challenges to be pursued via petitions for review with a federal appeals court. “That scheme ensures that petitioners get just one bite at the apple—not zero or two,” they stated, indicating that some petitioners, including Khalil, must await relief for allegations of unlawful government actions.
The law prevents Khalil “from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition,” the panel articulated, solidifying the government's authority in this context.
The decision marks a crucial win for the Trump administration's broad efforts to detain and deport noncitizens involved in protests against Israel.
While this ruling presents a setback, Khalil's legal team has expressed intentions to utilize every potential appeal route available to continue his fight.
An active figure in the pro-Palestinian movement at Columbia, Khalil was apprehended on March 8, 2025, and endured three months of detention in a Louisiana immigration facility, missing the birth of his first son. The government accuses him of leading actions “aligned to Hamas,” without substantiated evidence of criminal behavior.
The government’s justification for his arrest leverages a rarely invoked statute that permits the expulsion of noncitizens whose views could be seen as a threat to U.S. foreign relations. Following an initial ruling that found this justification likely unconstitutional, the Trump administration appealed, insisting that an immigration judge should ultimately decide the deportation case.
Khalil has described the allegations as “baseless” and has asserted that his detention is a retaliation for his advocacy in favor of Palestinian rights and an end to violence in Gaza. Currently, an immigration appeals board is deliberating a previous order from an immigration judge regarding Khalil’s deportation, but his attorneys maintain that the federal ruling should hold precedence and that Khalil could potentially be sent back to Algeria or Syria, where he increasingly fears for his safety.
