Immigration Judge Rules Khalil Can Be Deported, but Legal Hurdles Remain

An immigration judge in Louisiana found on Friday that the Trump administration could deport Mahmoud Khalil, granting the government an early victory in its efforts to crack down on pro-Palestinian demonstrations on U.S. college campuses.

The ruling is far from the final word on whether Mr. Khalil, a Columbia University graduate and legal permanent resident, will be deported. His lawyers will continue their fight in Louisiana and New Jersey, arguing that he has been targeted for constitutionally protected speech.

For the time being, the decision by the judge, Jamee E. Comans, affirmed the extraordinary power that the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, has asserted to target any noncitizen for deportation.

In Mr. Khalil’s case, Mr. Rubio relied on a rarely cited law, declaring that the Columbia graduate’s presence in the United States was adverse to American foreign policy interests. Judge Comans found that the government had met the burden of evidence the law requires.

Immigration judges are employees of the executive branch, not the judiciary, and often approve the Homeland Security Department’s deportation efforts. It would be unusual for such a judge, serving the U.S. attorney general, to grapple with the constitutional questions raised by Mr. Khalil’s case. She would also run the risk of being fired by an administration that has targeted dissenters.

“This court is without jurisdiction to entertain challenges to the validity of this law under the Constitution,” Judge Comans said as she delivered her ruling. She denied requests from Mr. Khalil’s lawyers, who had asked to cross-examine or depose Mr. Rubio so that he could elaborate on his claims.

At the end of the hearing, Mr. Khalil, who was otherwise silent, criticized the judge harshly.

“I would like to quote what you said last time that there’s nothing that’s more important to this court than due process rights and fundamental fairness,” he said. “Clearly, what we witnessed today, neither of these principles were present today or in this whole process. This is exactly why the Trump administration has sent me to this court, 1,000 miles away from my family.”

“This is not over, and our fight continues,” Marc Van Der Hout, a lawyer for Mr. Khalil, said in a statement after the hearing. “If Mahmoud can be targeted in this way, simply for speaking out for Palestinians and exercising his constitutionally protected right to free speech, this can happen to anyone over any issue the Trump administration dislikes.

Mr. Khalil’s immigration case now moves on to what is known as the “relief stage,” in which his lawyers will be able to argue for his right to stay in the country. If they lose there, they can appeal, first to an immigration board and then to a federal appeals court.

But the free speech and due process issues that loom over the case may first be scrutinized in federal court in New Jersey, where Mr. Khalil’s lawyers are also fighting for his release. The judge overseeing that case in Newark, Michael Farbiarz, has ordered the government not to remove Mr. Khalil from the country.

This is a developing story and will be updated.