Andrew Day on why conservatives should oppose the deportation of Khalil Mahmoud

The arrest and possible deportation of Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist, has galvanized the left and drawn criticism from liberals and civil libertarians. Even some neoconservatives have condemned the White House’s aggressive action earlier this month. MAGA conservatives should also oppose it. 

At least one prominent MAGA-friendly voice, the author Ann Coulter, has already spoken out against deporting Khalil, who was born in Syria.  “There’s almost no one I don’t want to deport, but, unless they’ve committed a crime, isn’t this a violation of the first amendment?” Coulter wrote last week on X.

Khalil, a green card holder whose wife is a U.S. citizen (and eight months pregnant), does indeed enjoy rights under the First Amendment.  The Supreme Court ruled in 1945 that alien residents cannot be deported for political speech, including speech in support of groups seeking to overthrow the U.S. government.  Notably, the Court rejected the government’s argument that the targeted alien held an “affiliation” with a subversive organization, judging that the claim relied on too loose a definition of that term.  The case, Bridges v. Wixon, is highly relevant to the controversy surrounding Khalil.

The Trump administration, in rescinding Khalil’s green card, invoked a 1952 immigration law to justify the move.  That statute, the Immigration and Nationality Act, empowers the government to deport any lawful permanent resident whom the secretary of state deems a danger to U.S. foreign policy interests.  The White House has said that Khalil, through his protest activities at Columbia University, promoted antisemitism.  Additionally, the Department of Homeland Security said that Khalil “led activities aligned to Hamas,” a designated terror organization. 

These justifications are spurious.  The First Amendment does not carve out an exception for speech that Marco Rubio labels “antisemitic,” and in any case Jewish students at Columbia have vouched for Khalil’s character.  As for the vague assertion that Khalil is “aligned” with Hamas, the administration has not produced evidence that he was affiliated with the group in any meaningful sense.  If the arrest of Khalil is legal under the Immigration and Nationality Act, then the relevant provisions of that law are null and void under the Constitution, the supreme law of the land.

~ Andrew Day, "Mahmoud Khalil, Viewed From the Right: MAGA should oppose the arrest and deportation of the pro-Palestinian activist," The American Conservative, March 19, 2025

Andrew Day on how the Israel lobby undermines sovereignty

Right-wingers tend to conceive of politics not in terms of rights, but of power.  One political ideal that relates to power and that MAGA conservatives should cherish is sovereignty.  What Mearsheimer’s comment suggests, even if he wouldn’t put the point in this way, is that Israel and the Israel lobby presently undermine the sovereignty of the United States. 

Sovereignty refers to the exclusive authority of a state over the country it rules and the nation it defends.  It is the glue that holds a political grouping together and safeguards its survival and liberty.  A state, to truly possess sovereignty, must have the power to make decisions free from foreign influence.  One reason the actions against Khalil should give MAGA pause is that the administration seems to be acting on behalf of Israel, not the American people. 

Here’s the plain truth: Khalil was arrested not because he posed a threat to the United States, but because he protested against Israel.  Drop Site News reported that Khalil’s arrest “followed a two-day targeted online campaign against Khalil by pro-Israel groups and individuals” (emphasis added).  President Donald Trump has alleged that Khalil supports Hamas, an enemy of Israel. Khalil led protests against the Israeli war in Gaza.  Miriam Adelson, a top donor to Trump’s presidential campaigns, has pushed the president to take pro-Israel actions and is leading the charge against critics of Israel on college campuses. 

As if to make clear which nation’s interests are actually implicated in the Khalil episode, the White House’s X account has written “Shalom Mahmoud,” using the Hebrew word for “goodbye.” 

I had thought English was America’s official language now.

[...]

The undue influence that pro-Israel groups exert over the U.S. government deserves close scrutiny and blunt criticism.  Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has long tried to drag the U.S. into war with Iran, which poses little threat to the American homeland.  The president seems on the verge of giving Bibi what he wants, though in Trump’s first term he griped that the Israeli leader was “willing to fight Iran to the last American soldier.”  In recent months, Israel’s supporters have sought to thwart foreign policy appointments perceived as inimical to Israel, and they may have succeeded last week.

The Trump administration simply cannot pursue an America-First policy agenda if its military and staffing decisions and the nation’s foundational rights are subject to Israeli veto.  Whatever MAGA conservatives think of Khalil or the views he espoused, they should oppose his deportation—for freedom, for sovereignty, and for America. 

~ Andrew Day, "Mahmoud Khalil, Viewed From the Right: MAGA should oppose the arrest and deportation of the pro-Palestinian activist," The American Conservative, March 19, 2025

2007