US Judge Eases Movement Limitations for Palestinian Activist Khalil, Permitting Unrestricted Travel Across the US
A federal magistrate has eased movement limitations within the United States for Mahmoud Khalil, allowing him to speak at gatherings and other engagements across the nation while he contests attempts to remove him.
Khalil, who was released from a US immigration jail in June after being arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement amid wider enforcement actions, had petitioned a judicial authority to lift the limitations that had limited his travel to specific locations.
At a virtual proceeding, his attorney stated that her client “desires to move for the very significant first amendment concerns that are at the bottom of this matter.”
“He seeks to address topics of public interest,” the attorney added, citing the constitutional right to free expression.
Mahmoud Khalil on detention, freedom and Ice detention: ‘It was a blatant act of cruelty’
However, the government’s lawyer, who opposed the request, argued that the respondent “has not offered enough of a reason why he couldn’t participate in these and other activities telephonically.”
Magistrate judge Michael Hammer agreed to permit Khalil to travel, noting that he was not deemed a risk of fleeing and had not breached any of his bail terms.
The magistrate concurred with the prosecution that Khalil is obligated to notify federal authorities about his travel plans.
The activist, who is a legal green card holder, was detained by immigration agents in March following his participation in activist demonstrations at the university, an Ivy League institution in New York.
The administration claims it had the authority to detain and deport him, arguing that his status in the United States is a threat to national security. A further claim is that he failed to disclose information about his employment background and membership in organizations on his petition for a green card.
Following his release, Khalil said he planned to persist in his condemnation of the university for what supporters consider as its acquiescence to government directives to restrict specific speech and address concerns against individuals on campus.
