Federal Judge Eases Movement Limitations for Palestinian Activist Khalil, Permitting Free Movement Within the US
A US magistrate has lifted movement limitations within the US for the Palestinian activist, permitting him to address events and other engagements across the country while he contests attempts to deport him.
Khalil, who was released from a Louisiana immigration jail in June after being arrested by federal agents amid wider enforcement actions, had requested a federal magistrate judge to remove the limitations that had confined his movement to specific locations.
At a remote hearing, his attorney stated that her the activist “wants to travel for the very important free speech reasons that are at the bottom of this matter.”
“He seeks to speak issues of public concern,” the attorney noted, referencing the constitutional protection to free speech.
Mahmoud Khalil on exile, liberation and federal custody: ‘It was a blatant act of injustice’
However, the federal lawyer, who objected to the request, argued that the respondent “has not provided enough of a reason why he couldn’t participate in these and other activities remotely.”
The judge the presiding official agreed to allow the activist to travel, stating that he was not considered a risk of fleeing and had not breached any of his bail terms.
The judge concurred with the prosecution that Khalil is obligated to alert federal authorities about his itinerary.
Khalil, who is a legal US permanent resident, was arrested by federal officers in early spring following his participation in pro-Palestinian demonstrations at the university, an prestigious school in New York.
The administration asserts it had the authority to arrest and deport him, claiming that his presence in the US is a risk to public safety. A further allegation is that he failed to disclose information about his work history and membership in organizations on his application for a permanent residency.
Following his freedom, Khalil said he planned to continue his criticism of the university for what activists consider as its acquiescence to government directives to curb certain speech and respond to threats against individuals on campus.
