AMY GOODMAN: We begin today’s show with an update on Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate who helped organize campus protests against Israel’s assault on Gaza and who acted as a negotiator between the administration and the students. He’s been detained in Louisiana since ICE arrested him last month.

An immigration judge ruled Friday the Trump administration has grounds to deport Khalil for taking part in the protests, despite being a legal permanent resident of the United States. They revoked his green card.

The decision by Assistant Chief Immigration Judge Jamee Comans in Louisiana came 48 hours after the government submitted their “evidence,” quote-unquote, on Khalil, which is simply a two-page memo from Secretary of State Marco Rubio conceding Khalil had no criminal history and that the U.S. is seeking to deport him based purely on his, quote, “beliefs, statements, or associations,” unquote. Agreeing with the memo, the judge ruled Khalil’s presence in the country posed, quote, “potentially serious foreign policy consequences.”

Secretary of State Rubio’s memo claimed allowing Khalil to remain in the United States would undermine, quote, “U.S. policy to combat antisemitism around the world and in the United States, in addition to [efforts to] protect Jewish students from harassment and violence in the United States,” unquote.

On Saturday, hundreds gathered in Times Square demanding Mahmoud Khalil’s release.

SALMA ALLAM: I thought that our democracy is under threat, that we are supposed to live in a country where people have rights, where people have First Amendment rights, have the right to freedom of speech, have the right to protest, have the right to take the streets. And I thought that this is under attack. If they can come for Mahmoud, then they can come for any of us.

AMY GOODMAN: At last count, over 500 international students at more than 80 colleges and universities have had their visas revoked in recent weeks.

On Friday, Mahmoud Khalil addressed the court after the ruling. He said, quote, “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. … 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. I just hope that the urgency that you deemed fit for me are afforded to the hundreds of others who have been here without hearing for months,” unquote.

Mahmoud Khalil has separate court cases playing out in two states. The Louisiana case is focused on his deportation order. That’s an immigration court. And the New Jersey case is focused on his habeas petition challenging the legality of his detention. That’s a federal court.

For more, we’re joined in studio by Diala Shamas, one of the attorneys representing Mahmoud Khalil, senior staff attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Diala, welcome back to Democracy Now! Can you just explain what’s happening here? The judge says he can be deported, but that is not where it ends.

DIALA SHAMAS: Absolutely, Amy. And thanks for having me.

So, it’s important for people to understand that there are two parallel tracks here. The judge is an immigration judge, on Friday. And she simply rubber-stamped that memo, that memo that says, in broad terms, that the secretary of state determined that Mahmoud Khalil presents — that his continued presence presents foreign policy consequences. And she essentially said that her hands are tied. She deferred to the executive and told Mahmoud’s lawyers to take it up with Congress. And so, that is the immigration judge.

And it’s important also to underscore that we were not surprised by that outcome. That is exactly — that outcome is exactly the reason that the Trump administration has been whisking people away to places like Louisiana and Texas, because they believe those forums are favorable, but also why they want to keep these cases in immigration court and not have federal court review.

So, we have this parallel federal court case, which is the one that we’re really focused on, because that’s where the constitutional claims, his First Amendment and due process claims, are being adjudicated. We are asking — we have pending motions before the federal court in New Jersey — they are still pending — to release Mahmoud Khalil and to challenge his detention and to challenge the basis for his detention.

AMY GOODMAN: And explain why New Jersey and not New York.

DIALA SHAMAS: Well, there’s a few different ways in which the government has tried to whisk Mahmoud away from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Initially, we were in New York because that’s where his lawyers understood him to be when they filed the habeas corpus petition, but turns out that they had already moved him to New Jersey. And after a fight where the government tried to move the case to federal court in Louisiana, we were eventually able to win that first big win for Mahmoud and be in New Jersey. So, New Jersey is, of course, closer to where his counsel are. It’s where he was when we filed that petition. And it’s closer to his community. So we’re still fighting to bring him back to this area.

AMY GOODMAN: And the significance of him being picked up in Columbia University housing, having sent a letter like the day before to the president of Columbia saying he was very afraid about what was going to happen? He was there, coming from iftar with his wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, who is about to give birth.

DIALA SHAMAS: Yeah, she’s due later this month. And that’s why we are moving with urgency. The government is trying to slow down the court in — the case in federal court and speed it up in immigration court, because they know that that’s a favorable venue for them. Of course —

AMY GOODMAN: Can the courts clash, immigration and federal?

DIALA SHAMAS: Federal courts are where we’re bringing the constitutional claims and, ultimately, where we want him to be ordered released. There’s a complex way in which federal and immigration courts — I wouldn’t say “clash,” but they have two entirely different functions. Remember, federal court judges have life tenure. They are the third branch of government. And immigration courts, although we call them immigration courts, they function like a traffic court. They’re administrative courts. The judges are hired, essentially, by the executive branch, and so are much more at the mercy of the executive branch.

So, the more robust process, the due process rights, those are all in federal court, and that’s what we’re pushing the case forward there. And I know that the headlines that a judge found him deportable have been really scary to many, but people need to understand that that was not a surprising outcome.

AMY GOODMAN: Was he in court?

DIALA SHAMAS: He was in court, and he read that incredible statement that you read earlier in the show. And I will say that that statement is so emblematic of the poise with which Mahmoud has carried himself since the beginning of this ordeal, and also the care for others that he’s exhibited since day one of his detention, you know, that he used the spotlight on him to shine a spotlight on others.

And that’s an important thing to underscore and that he’s modeling for all of us. He has not for one minute stopped highlighting the situation in Gaza, where we have now more than 50,000 people who have been killed, and wanting to make sure that we all know that that is the reason that he is being subject — he and many others are being subject to this retaliatory policy of arresting, detaining and transferring people simply for their protest.

AMY GOODMAN: So, what is the timetable for the New Jersey federal court? And when the judge hears his case there, does he, as he was in immigration court, get to be in a New Jersey court?

DIALA SHAMAS: We hope so. I mean, the judge in federal court in New Jersey understands the urgency. Right after our Friday hearing in immigration court, the judge called counsel in to federal court and asked for a report back from what happened that day and also has requested, you know, the transcripts and the details of the hearing. So, we’re hopeful that he understand the urgency and that he will not allow the Trump administration to bypass the authorities and run roughshod over due process by accelerating the case in immigration court.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to ask you about another case. But before I do, let me just read what Dr. Noor Abdalla had to say. In statement that was read during Friday’s briefing, Mahmoud’s wife, Dr. Abdalla, said, quote, “My husband is a political prisoner who is being deprived of his rights because he believes Palestinians deserve equal dignity and freedom. … There is nothing the government can say about my husband that can silence this truth.” How does that weigh in in the court, at the court level?

DIALA SHAMAS: We are bringing fundamental First Amendment challenges, claiming — showing that Mahmoud was targeted as part of this retaliatory policy because of his speech. But I’d like to say something, if I may, about this First Amendment point. Oftentimes we talk about the First Amendment as a part of the Constitution that’s there to protect even the most unpopular opinions and that even controversial views should be protected. But here with Mahmoud, it’s important to underscore that he’s actually in the majority.

His views, the reasons he’s being retaliated against, the reason the Trump administration wants to silence him and many others like him is because they are widely held. The notion that Palestinians in Gaza should not be subject to a genocide, as the International Court of Justice found, the notion that 50,000 people are — that we shouldn’t be funding and sending weapons to a military that has been targeting civilians and families the way that the Israeli government has been, that is a widely held political view, and there is some gaslighting that this administration is engaging in by suggesting that it is a minority, that it is against foreign policy. This is fundamentally because they are afraid of this very popular political movement here in the United States. And that’s what Mahmoud has been shining a light on throughout the — since the beginning of his having the spotlight.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to turn to another high-profile immigration case. In a unanimous ruling last week — and I just wanted you to explain this — the Supreme Court ruled, ordered the Trump administration to, quote, “facilitate” the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the United States, after the Maryland resident, father of three, with no criminal record, was denied due process and sent to the notorious CECOT prison in El Salvador. But the court remained vague on how exactly this would happen, and the Trump administration has claimed it has no way of ensuring his safe return. In a minute, we’re going to speak with Maria Hinojosa, who tried to get into that CECOT prison, and we’ll talk about Bukele’s, the president of El Salvador’s, visit with Trump today. But if you, as a lawyer, could just explain what this unanimous ruling means, when they say Trump should “facilitate” him coming home?

DIALA SHAMAS: Well, of course, there is this ambiguous paragraph, and this administration is trying to get the most out of that ambiguous language. And what we are seeing, ultimately, is actually a throughline between the Mahmoud Khalil case and the El Salvador case, which is the Trump administration is invoking unfettered executive power and authority and invoking this notion of foreign relations, which they said here in a filing on Sunday is a reason to not interfere in how they’re dealing with bringing people back. And so, you can’t do whatever you want, run nilly-willy over people’s rights by simply invoking foreign relations, foreign affairs, foreign policy. There is nothing more domestic of a matter than the notion that courts should have the ability to oversee how we rip people away from their families here in the United States.

AMY GOODMAN: Diala Shamas, I want to thank you so much for being with us, one of the attorneys representing Mahmoud Khalil, senior staff attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights.

Coming up next, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Maria Hinojosa, just back from El Salvador, where she attempted to get into the CECOT prison, the supermax prison where Kilmar Abrego Garcia is being held, this as President Trump meets with the president of El Salvador, who has called himself “the coolest dictator.” Stay with us.