Lead

A US appeals court has overturned a lower court ruling that ordered the release of Columbia University activist Mohsen Mahdawi from immigration detention, a decision that could lead to his re-arrest and marks the latest legal victory for the Trump administration's efforts to deport pro-Palestinian student protesters.

The ruling, issued on Tuesday by a three-judge panel of the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, reverses a 2025 decision by Vermont-based US District Judge Geoffrey Crawford, who had ordered Mahdawi's release and accused the administration of causing "great harm" to someone who had committed no crime.

The appeals court found that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear Mahdawi's case, determining that it should have been resolved in immigration court first. The panel did not weigh in on the merits of Mahdawi's claim that he was unconstitutionally targeted for criticizing Israel, but noted he could seek review from federal courts once he exhausts his options in the immigration courts.

Coverage Comparison

The decision was reported by Al Jazeera, The Guardian, and the Jerusalem Post, each framing the ruling within the broader context of the Trump administration's immigration crackdown and its impact on student protesters.

Al Jazeera's coverage emphasized the decision as a victory for the Trump administration's campaign targeting foreign student protesters, describing Mahdawi's arrest as part of a broader effort to deport pro-Palestinian activists. The outlet highlighted Mahdawi's accusation that the administration weaponized the immigration system to silence his political views.

The Guardian's reporting focused on the potential for Mahdawi's re-arrest and noted that the Trump administration has spent more than a year trying to deport him. The outlet also provided background on Mahdawi, who was born in a refugee camp in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and became a legal permanent resident of the US in 2015.

The Jerusalem Post's coverage centered on the jurisdictional basis of the ruling, noting that the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals found the lower court lacked authority to hear the case. The outlet also contextualized the decision within the broader crackdown on immigration that has been challenged as infringing on free speech.

Key Claims

  • A US appeals court overturned a 2025 ruling that ordered Mahdawi's release from immigration detention, with the court finding that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to hear the case.
  • Mahdawi was arrested in April 2025 after attending what he believed was an interview related to his US citizenship application. He was detained for two weeks and charged with no crime.
  • The Trump administration has argued that it has the authority to seek the deportation of non-citizens whose presence could have "adverse foreign policy consequences" for the US.
  • Mahdawi accused the Trump administration of weaponizing the immigration system to silence his political views.
  • The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals found that the lower court lacked jurisdiction because the case should have been resolved in immigration court first.
  • Mahdawi was born in a refugee camp in the Israeli-occupied West Bank and became a legal permanent resident of the US in 2015.

Perspectives

  • Mahdawi and his attorneys: Mahdawi called the appeals court decision "a grave setback," stating it would hand the government "the power to intimidate, censor, and punish dissent without meaningful restraint." His attorneys at the American Civil Liberties Union said the government could not detain or deport their client as the appeals process proceeds.
  • The Trump administration: The administration has spent more than a year trying to deport Mahdawi, arguing that it has authority to seek deportation of non-citizens whose presence could have "adverse foreign policy consequences" for the US. The ruling is seen as a victory for this approach.
  • The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals: The court's unanimous decision found that the lower court overstepped its authority by intervening before Mahdawi's case had moved fully through the immigration court system, without ruling on the merits of his constitutional claims.