• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

(NPR) Judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can be deported

Slartibartfast

Jesus loves you.
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
85,137
Reaction score
78,163
Location
NE Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
According to Rubio (wink, wink), this person seemed to be a threat to our foreign policy goals. How, I have no idea.

But I hate to see this attack on the First Amendment and common decency.
 

MAGA, this is how things should work. Mahmoud got his due process and was able to see a judge who looked at all aspects of his case. He was then ruled deportable.

This is how you can get rid of the people you so desperately want to get rid of, but still respect the law.

Hopefully this is a lesson for you.
And he can still appeal all the way to the Supreme Court.
 
And there are significant legal reasons for doing so.

Absolutely.

“Freedom of speech is back” Trump January 2025.

Hasn’t exactly aged well.

The best and brightest around the world should take heed of all this, don’t risk coming to live, work or study in the US, if you say something Trump doesn’t like, you may be out on your arse.
 
While Friday's hearing took place in immigration court, a separate case has been playing out in a federal court in New Jersey over whether Khalil should have been arrested and detained at all.
:rolleyes:
 

MAGA, this is how things should work. Mahmoud got his due process and was able to see a judge who looked at all aspects of his case. He was then ruled deportable.

As others have noted, when you understand this, and as others in the thread understand it, you won't call it due process.

That is because for Democrat due process is code for "we can keep engaging in legal filings forever or until we win at which case they have to stop forever."

This is how you can get rid of the people you so desperately want to get rid of, but still respect the law.

Hopefully this is a lesson for you.

So according to your link just having Marco Rubio declare them to be an antisemitic threat means they get to go.

In an undated 2-page memo submitted to the court, Rubio detailed that on March 7 he got information about Khalil from the Department of Homeland Security and as a result he determined that allowing Khalil to remain in the country would undermine a U.S. foreign policy goal of combating antisemitism around the world.

During a hearing at the remote Louisiana detention center where Khalil is being held, Judge Jamee Comans said Friday that she had no authority to question Rubio's determination.

Sounds exactly like what myself and others have been saying. The Executive Branch determines such matters and judges do not get to question those determinations.

Khalil will not immediately be deported. His attorneys have said that if he were ordered deported, they would appeal the judge's ruling. Comans gave Khalil until April 23 to request a stay of his deportation if his attorneys believe he qualifies for one. And the judge said if they don't meet that deadline, she will order him deported either to Syria, where he was born, or to Algeria, where he is a citizen.

So the point is he will already appeal. The judge can choose not to issue a stay of deportation in which case he will be deported but it is likely that his attorneys will just resort to more and more filings with more extraordinary claims or engage in judge shopping which is what we have seen so far. They file with a Democrat judge in Northern California or Hawaii via the ACLU and they get that stay issued and then we have to escalate the stay and so on because one judge in one district gets to do whatever they want and the other judges have to wait and sort it out.

Khalil, 30, was arrested March 8 at the university-owned apartment building in New York City where he lives with his wife, a U.S. citizen who is pregnant. He was transported to the Jena/LaSalle Detention Facility in Jena, La., where he has been held since.

Expect all of those variables to be used to justify his staying.

This isn't due process. It is the opposite. If or when his stay isn't granted, he should be gone.
 
As others have noted, when you understand this, and as others in the thread understand it, you won't call it due process.

That is because for Democrat due process is code for "we can keep engaging in legal filings forever or until we win at which case they have to stop forever."



So according to your link just having Marco Rubio declare them to be an antisemitic threat means they get to go.



Sounds exactly like what myself and others have been saying. The Executive Branch determines such matters and judges do not get to question those determinations.



So the point is he will already appeal. The judge can choose not to issue a stay of deportation in which case he will be deported but it is likely that his attorneys will just resort to more and more filings with more extraordinary claims or engage in judge shopping which is what we have seen so far. They file with a Democrat judge in Northern California or Hawaii via the ACLU and they get that stay issued and then we have to escalate the stay and so on because one judge in one district gets to do whatever they want and the other judges have to wait and sort it out.



Expect all of those variables to be used to justify his staying.

This isn't due process. It is the opposite. If or when his stay isn't granted, he should be gone.
Yes, going through court proceedings may end up with a ruling in someone’s favor. It also may not. That’s how it’s supposed to work.
 
Yes, going through court proceedings may end up with a ruling in someone’s favor. It also may not. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

That isn't how it works for Democrats. They just keep changing laws, re-configuring charges and more in their lawfare. Then on their side they just find the right judges and venues and get one decision to type up the process for years.
 
That isn't how it works for Democrats. They just keep changing laws, re-configuring charges and more in their lawfare. Then on their side they just find the right judges and venues and get one decision to type up the process for years.
Let me know when you are done whining.
 

Judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can be deported…​


… again:

An immigration judge in Louisiana has ordered pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, a legal permanent resident of the U.S., deported to Syria or Algeria for failing to disclose certain information on his green card application, according to documents filed in federal court Wednesday by his lawyers.
Immigration judge orders Mahmoud Khalil deported to Syria or Algeria

Can we please get rid of this asshole once and for all? This has gone on long enough.

 
That isn't how it works for Democrats. They just keep changing laws, re-configuring charges and more in their lawfare. Then on their side they just find the right judges and venues and get one decision to type up the process for years.
right wing blather. vague and whining.
 

MAGA, this is how things should work. Mahmoud got his due process and was able to see a judge who looked at all aspects of his case. He was then ruled deportable.

This is how you can get rid of the people you so desperately want to get rid of, but still respect the law.

Hopefully this is a lesson for you.
The guy incites violence and you're OK with that?
 
right wing blather. vague and whining.

Since when is enforcing the law, including multiple immigration judges’ orders, “right wing”? The latest one determined Khalil “knowingly misrepresented material facts” on his green card application and was not eligible for a discretionary waiver of those omissions.

 
Since when is enforcing the law, including multiple immigration judges’ orders, “right wing”? The latest one determined Khalil “knowingly misrepresented material facts” on his green card application and was not eligible for a discretionary waiver of those omissions.

You realize, I hope, that this wasn't a real judge, but a DoJ functionary who would be summarily fired if she didn't stick to the script, right?
 
You realize, I hope, that this wasn't a real judge, but a DoJ functionary who would be summarily fired if she didn't stick to the script, right?

So is it fake law, too? If he thinks he’s being unfairly picked on, he can have his 19-lawyer army appeal it to “real” judges, which they are doing.
 
Back
Top Bottom