Mahmoud Khalil Asks Supreme Court to Let Him Sue Over Free Speech Claims

Mahmoud Khalil, the former Columbia University graduate student and pro-Palestinian activist, has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to let him sue the Trump administration over claims that it violated his First Amendment rights, ABC News reported. The appeal follows a ruling by a divided federal appeals court that he cannot bring those claims before a judge until his immigration proceedings are finished.

If the justices decline the case, Khalil could be deported before he has a chance to argue that the government targeted him over his speech, according to ABC News.

What is Khalil asking the Supreme Court to do?

Khalil wants the court to allow him to pursue a lawsuit alleging that the government retaliated against him for speech it disliked. The case turns on habeas corpus, the procedure that lets a person held by the government challenge that confinement before a judge.

ABC News reported that if the justices take the case and rule that Khalil can use that procedure, his retaliation claims can go forward.

How did the case get here?

Federal agents arrested Khalil, a green card holder married to an American citizen, in New York City in March 2025. He was held more than 100 days in ICE custody. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had signed an unusual determination that Khalil's activities compromised a compelling U.S. foreign policy interest, according to ABC News.

Khalil has not been charged with a crime. After a legal challenge, he was released from custody while his petition is decided. Earlier this year, a divided appeals court ruled that he could not litigate his claims before a judge unless and until the immigration proceedings against him were complete.

What does each side say?

Khalil contends that President Donald Trump deliberately targeted him as part of a broader effort to crack down on pro-Palestinian protests and debate over Israel's war in Gaza on college campuses. His attorney, Baher Azmy, said Khalil has never committed a crime and argued that his detention and removal stem only from speech the government dislikes. Azmy called it an unprecedented weaponization of immigration power and said the question is whether federal courts can address it.

The White House, asked for comment, said the executive branch has the authority to take actions that protect the country and the immigration system. Spokeswoman Lauren Bis said Khalil obtained his visa by willfully and intentionally failing to report accurately information about his background, and that people who lie to the government to gain entry will face justice. Khalil has not been charged with a crime, and ABC News did not report any ruling on the administration's claim about his visa.

Is this the only legal fight?

No. Khalil has a separate challenge pending in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. That case focuses on U.S. immigration law, according to ABC News, rather than on the free speech and habeas questions before the Supreme Court.

What does this mean for Khalil and other immigrants?

For Khalil, the practical stakes are whether he can make his retaliation case in court before any removal. He said at a remote press conference on Monday that the fight is not only about whether he can stay in the country, but about whether anyone can speak out for Palestinians without being punished.

He also framed the case as larger than himself. He said he can afford to lose, unlike thousands of immigrants who cannot, and described his situation as a small part of what other families are going through. Those statements are his own characterization; the appeal itself concerns his case.

What happens next?

ABC News reported that the justices are likely to consider the petition at a formal private meeting in January. If they agree to hear the case, oral argument would likely be scheduled for the spring, with a decision expected by the end of June.

Around Prague, based on reporting by ABC News