Supporters protest Mahmoud Khalil’s release from ice detention
Advocates demanded the release of Mahmoud Khalil when they attended a hearing at LaSalle Immigration Court in Iena, Louisiana.
A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration could detain Mahmoud Khalil under secondary legal arguments.
On June 13, New Jersey US District Judge Michael Fabiartz rejected the request of a 30-year-old Palestinian-Columbia University graduate who was released three months after immigration detention.
On June 11, Falbiartz initially determined that Halil had not been detained due to Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s determination that he had threatened the interests of American foreign policy. However, Falbialz has left other options open for immigration and customs enforcement to preserve the Halil.
Prior to the deadline for the corresponding court order on June 13, Justice Department lawyers alleged that under federal immigration law, Halil was presented to the court for misrepresenting information about his permanent residence application.
“Halil is currently in custody on other charges of removability,” a Justice Department lawyer wrote in a letter filed in court on June 13. “It is legal to bind Khalil on other grounds of removal.”
They said Halil has the option to seek his release, which is currently pending charges.
Farbiarz sided with the assessment and said the secondary charges were not blocked by the court.
He said, “There are many ways to do this now in ‘Halil’, including bail applications to immigration judges who are primarily diving in immigration cases.”
Halil’s lawyer, Amy Greer, said the government is using “cruel and transparent delay tactics” to keep him away from his wife and son, born on June 15th, on his first father’s day.
“Instead of celebrating together, he suffers from ice detention as a punishment for his advocacy on behalf of his fellow Palestinians,” Greer said in a statement.
The Justice Department had no comments beyond the application, an agency spokesperson said in an email.
The government had to appeal the judge’s first ruling until June 13th. Justice Department lawyers urged Halil to follow administrative measures instead of filing it in federal court.
“These administrative processes are the right path for Halil to seek release and that the government has determined that it cannot detain Halil on a charge in the federal district court that the government has never found it illegal,” the government’s lawyer said in a letter.
His original June 11 ruling demanded that Fabiartz Khalil be temporarily blocked by federal officials deporting him under Rubio’s resolve. On June 13, he responded to extending government time to appeal his decision. Justice Department lawyers instead raised a second argument.
Khalil’s legal team wrote to Farbiarz on the morning of June 13th, demanding that the client be released as an appeal from the government failed to meet the morning deadline.
Halil has been running at the Louisiana Immigration Detention Center since March. His lawyer fought alongside his wife and newborn son Dean for his release.
However, the June 12 email was sent to Halil’s attorneys by Brian Acuna, director of the New Orleans Ice Field Office. His lawyers should instead contact Ice’s Chief Counsel of Chief Counsel of Office about the matter, the email said.
Immigration agents arrested Halil, a green cardholder who married an American citizen on March 8th, in the lobby of a university-owned apartment complex in Manhattan.
A Palestinian born in Syria, Khalil was a spokesman and negotiator for Colombian pro-Palestinian protesters. Halil was not accused of a crime.
The Trump administration argued that non-citizens could be deported if the Secretary of State discovers that their existence threatens the interests of our foreign policy, even if their beliefs, statements, or associations are “otherwise legal.” They cited the rarely used provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952.
Fabiartz opposed the Secretary of State’s decision, calling it a secondary argument – that he omitted information about his application “almost certainly flows” from Rubio’s resolve.
On June 13, Farbiarz said he had not given any de facto evidence as to why it was illegal to hold him on a second charge.