Appeals Court Reverses Release of Pro-Palestinian Activist Mahmoud Khalil

Federal Appeals Court Overturns Khalil's Release

A federal appeals court on Thursday, January 15, 2026, reversed a lower court's decision that had ordered the release of pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia delivered a 2-1 ruling, siding with the Trump administration in its ongoing efforts to deport the former Columbia University graduate student.

The appeals court's decision found that the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, which had initially ordered Khalil's release, lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over his claims. Circuit Judges Thomas Hardiman and Stephanos Bibas, in their majority opinion, stated that federal immigration law dictates that challenges to deportation proceedings should be heard through an immigration court and subsequently reviewed by a federal appeals court, rather than a lower district court via a habeas petition.

Background of Khalil's Detention and Previous Release

Mahmoud Khalil, a prominent figure in pro-Palestinian campus activism, was initially detained by ICE agents on March 8, 2025. Despite being a lawful permanent resident (green card holder) and married to a U.S. citizen with whom he has an American child, Khalil was held for over three months, missing the birth of his son. The Trump administration sought his deportation, citing a 'foreign policy ground' and alleging that his activism posed a threat to U.S. foreign policy interests.

On June 20, 2025, U.S. District Judge Michael E. Farbiarz ordered Khalil's release, ruling that his confinement was likely an unconstitutional punishment for his political speech. Judge Farbiarz determined that Khalil was neither a flight risk nor a danger to the community, and questioned the government's justifications for his detention. This decision was seen as a significant victory for Khalil and civil liberties groups, who argued that his detention was an attempt to suppress free speech.

Implications and Future Legal Steps

The recent appeals court ruling, while a setback for Khalil's legal team, does not immediately lead to his re-detention. His legal representatives, including the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), have stated their intent to pursue further legal avenues, including seeking review en banc from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

In a statement, Khalil expressed his disappointment but affirmed his resolve, saying, 'Today's ruling is deeply disappointing, but it does not break our resolve. The door may have been opened for potential re-detainment down the line, but it has not closed our commitment to Palestine and to justice and accountability. I will continue to fight, through every legal avenue and with every ounce of determination, until my rights, and the rights of others like me, are fully protected.' The appeals court's decision did not address the core First Amendment arguments regarding Khalil's free speech rights, focusing instead on jurisdictional matters.