Mahmoud Khalil asks US Supreme Court to halt deportation after appeals court ruling

Emergency appeal at the Supreme Court

Mahmoud Khalil's lawyers filed an emergency application with the US Supreme Court on Monday, 19 October, seeking an immediate stay of a decision by the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. The appeals court found that a challenge to his immigration detention must first be weighed in immigration court, which sits under the executive branch, rather than in federal district court. Khalil's legal team argues that the ruling could pave the way for his re-arrest and deportation. The 3rd Circuit has put its own ruling on hold so the case can reach the justices, and Khalil remains free for now.

From arrest to release

Khalil, a lawful permanent US resident and former Columbia University graduate student, was arrested by ICE agents in March 2025 inside the student housing where he lived with his wife, an American citizen. He became the first student protester known to be targeted for pro-Palestinian views under Trump's second administration. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had determined that his presence undercut US national interests, relying on a rarely used provision of a statute that gives the secretary sweeping power to expel foreigners. Khalil was held for more than three months in a Louisiana detention facility, far from his wife in New York. In June 2025 a federal judge in New Jersey ordered him released, finding the law Rubio cited was most likely unconstitutional. The administration has kept trying to deport him, producing a series of legal maneuvers across different courts.

What the petition asks the justices

Khalil's lawyers want the court to rule that noncitizens have the right to sue when immigration officials detain them in retaliation for speech protected by the First Amendment. The filing also asks the justices to let federal judges quickly decide whether immigration-related detentions are lawful, so that people are not held for months or years without judicial oversight. Khalil framed the stakes in broader terms at a briefing on Monday.

“If the Trump administration can punish someone for their pro-Palestine speech, this or any future administration can punish anyone for any speech.”

Whether the court takes the case, and when it would decide, is unclear. The justices' current term already includes other closely watched immigration cases, including whether the administration can send migrants to countries that are not their own.

Government position and wider stakes

The Department of Homeland Security said in a statement that the Trump administration acted within its statutory and constitutional authority in Khalil's case, and it urged him to leave through the CBP Home app. The administration has said his prominent role in Columbia protests against Israel's war in Gaza and his continued presence spread antisemitism and clash with Trump's foreign policy goals. Khalil has denounced antisemitism and said criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic. Separately, the government has asked the Supreme Court to overturn a 4th Circuit ruling that upheld the release of Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri, a decision that conflicts with the 3rd Circuit's Khalil ruling. Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which is part of Khalil's legal team, called the decision dangerous.

“What's particularly dangerous about this decision is the idea that you can be in detention based on some arbitrary executive diktat.”

Conflicting appeals court rulings can increase the chances that the justices agree to hear a case, although the Supreme Court typically accepts only a small percentage of appeals.