News

Can the Trump administration legally deport Palestinian rights advocate Mahmoud Khalil? 3 things to know about green card holders’ rights

Published

24 minutes ago

March 15, 2025

The Conversation

file 20250312 66 4qnu4g — Mahmoud Khalil, center, a permanent resident facing deportation, speaks at a press conference organized by Palestinian rights protesters at Columbia University in New York City on June 1, 2024. Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images

Gabriel J. Chin, University of California, Davis

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that the government will deport lawful permanent residents who support Hamas and came to the U.S. as students with an intent “to rile up all kinds of anti-Jewish student, antisemitic activities,” referencing the Palestinian rights protests at universities in 2024.

“And if you end up having a green card – not citizenship, but a green card – as a result of that visa while you’re here and those activities, we’re going to kick you out. It’s as simple as that. This is not about free speech. This is about people that don’t have a right to be in the United States to begin with,” Rubio said on March 12, 2025.

That policy has now ensnared Mahmoud Khalil, a recent graduate of Columbia University and a leader in the Palestinian rights protest movement at the school. Khalil, a Palestinian who was born in Syria, faces deportation after he was arrested on March 8, 2025, in New York City. The that the secretary of state had determined Khalil’s presence or activities in the country posed “serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”

Mahmoud Khalil,

Khalil entered the U.S. on a student visa in 2022. In 2024, he received a green card and became a lawful permanent resident – meaning he has the legal right to work and stay in the U.S. There are an estimated 12.8 million lawful permanent residents in the country.

Khalil’s lawyers say that his arrest and pending deportation are unconstitutional.

In many respects, the rights of lawful permanent residents and citizens are similar. Yet citizens and lawful permanent residents do not enjoy equal status under the law.

The Supreme Court and other courts recognize that lawful permanent residents have First Amendment rights to free speech.

Yet the Supreme Court upheld deporting lawful permanent residents in the 1950s based on their political activity, in particular membership in the Communist Party.

So, while lawful permanent residents may not be criminally prosecuted for their political speech or activity, what they say or write may well affect their ability to remain in the U.S., if the government determines that they are a security risk.

I’m a scholar of immigration law. Here are three major differences between the rights of citizens and lawful permanent residents.

People stand together and hold signs that say 'Release Mahmoud Khalil' in front of a large building while police officers in black watch. — Court officers watch protestors demonstrating for the release of Mahmoud Khalil at Foley Square in New York City on March 10, 2025. David Dee Delgado/Getty Images

1. Limited political rights

Lawful permanent residents are people born in other countries who can legally work and live in the U.S. for as long as they like. They may enlist in the U.S. armed forces, apply to become U.S. citizens, and are legally protected against discrimination by private employers.

States also generally cannot discriminate against lawful permanent residents – though states may require certain groups of people, such as teachers or police, to have U.S. citizenship.

Between 1820 and 1920, noncitizens routinely participated in different aspects of government, including voting, holding office and jury service in many states and territories.

These days, states and the federal government generally allow only citizens to serve on juries, hold political positions and vote. With a few exceptions, such as voting in some local elections, permanent residents are not able to do any of these things.

2. Limited public benefits

The distinction between noncitizens and citizens extends to other areas of life, such as public benefits.

The Supreme Court has frequently stated, “In the exercise of its broad power over naturalization and immigration, Congress regularly makes rules that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.”

In practice, this means that the federal government – and to a much lesser extent, states – do not offer public benefits, such as Medicaid and other kinds of government support, to lawful permanent residents and other noncitizens on the same basis as citizens.

For example, lawful permanent residents must generally wait five years before becoming eligible for certain programs intended to support low-income people, such as Supplemental Security Income and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

3. Reversal of immigration status

Finally, unlike citizens, lawful permanent residents can lose their legal immigration status.

Congress has enacted many grounds for deporting a noncitizen, or stopping them from entering the country.

Some courts have found that the U.S. government can deport a lawful permanent resident because of national security or terrorism concerns, even if the person has not committed a crime.

The Trump administration argues that they can deport lawful permanent residents like Khalil under the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that a lawful permanent resident can be deported if the secretary of state has reasonable ground to believe that this person “would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States.”

The Trump administration had initiated deportation proceedings against Khalil on this ground.

U.S. law also provides that any non-citizen can be deported if the secretary of state and the attorney general jointly determine that the person is associated with terrorism, or poses a threat to the U.S. In addition, the law says an immigrant can be deported if they “endorse or espouse terrorist activity or persuades others” to endorse or espouse terrorist activity or support a terrorist organization.

Still, lawful permanent residents are entitled to certain basic rights, such as retaining a lawyer to represent them in administrative hearings and court before they are deported.

By contrast, the U.S. government cannot deport a U.S. citizen for any reason. However, sometimes U.S. citizens are deported by mistake.

Indeed, the Supreme Court has found that while it is constitutional to execute a military member for desertion in wartime, it would be cruel and unusual punishment to deprive them of citizenship.

A man with dark hair and a black suit gestures facing people looking at him. — Secretary of State Marco Rubio, seen on March 12, 2025, in Shannon, Ireland, has said that the U.S. will deport any noncitizen who supports Hamas. Saul Loeb/POOL/AFP via Getty Images

Legal grounds for deporting noncitizens

There have been few recent court cases testing the scope of deporting lawful permanent residents on national security grounds based on pure speech.

In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled that if a person is deportable, they are deportable – even if there is some other reason that motivated the government’s deportation proceedings, such as a suspicion that the non-citizen is involved with crime or terrorism.

The Supreme Court also then held that the government could deport non-citizens for technical visa violations, even if the case was based on the government’s belief that the non-citizens were associated with a terrorist group.

There is also some precedent arguing that deportation based on “adverse foreign policy consequences” is too broad and nonspecific to be constitutional.

Indeed, Marianne Trump Barry, the sister of the president, held this opinion when she was a federal judge in the mid-1990s. But Samuel Alito, then an appeals court judge, overturned Barry’s ruling on procedural grounds in 1996.

For its part, the Supreme Court has occasionally held that very broad and indeterminate deportation grounds are “void for vagueness,” meaning so sweeping and imprecise that they are unconstitutional.

Khalil’s lawyers appeared with U.S. government lawyers before a federal judge in New York on March 12. Their goal: to get Khalil moved from internment in Louisiana back to internment in New York. But that may well be just the beginning of a long haul for the Palestinian student. Courts have proved reluctant to second-guess security grounds rationales in immigration cases. For these reasons, cases like Khalil’s may go on for years.

Gabriel J. Chin, Professor of Criminal Law, Immigration, and Race and Law, University of California, Davis

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Tell us what did you think about this article?Cancel reply

Foodie News

Savory Favorites to Make St. Patrick’s Day Special

Published

1 day ago

March 14, 2025

Daily News Staff

Hearty recipes for celebrating from the comfort of home

(Family Features) While some St. Patrick’s Day celebrations call for green beer and large gatherings, you may instead opt for a cozy evening at home with comforting foods and close friends. Whether your shamrock spirit leads you out for a local parade or you’re more of a stay-at-home leprechaun, there is one tradition all can agree on: delicious Irish food.

If a quieter night cooking at home is up your alley, you’re in luck. You can put a meal worthy of gold on the table with these festive Irish favorites from “Cookin’ Savvy.”

A hearty home-cooked meal loaded with flavor and sure to fill you with cheer, Irish Beef and Beer Pot Pie is made piping hot to warm up any St. Patrick’s Day party. Full of hashbrowns, carrots, peas and beef, it’s a twist on tradition served with puff pastry topping the tasty stew. A cup of your favorite stout beer, of course, will come in handy for deglazing the skillet to ensure you enjoy every bit of beefy flavor.

Perfect for serving as a sweet complement to coffee or tea, or all on its own as a nightcap nibble, Irish Sweet Soda Bread comes together in a snap so you can let it bake while enjoying the main course. Offering an easy way to participate in the festivities, it might just become a household favorite to be savored year-round.

Make your home a St. Patrick’s Day haven with these hearty recipes then discover more celebratory meal ideas from “Cookin’ Savvy” by visiting Culinary.net.

Irish Beef and Beer Pot Pie

Recipe courtesy of “Cookin’ Savvy”
Servings: 4-6

1 pound ground beef
1 cup stout beer
3 tablespoons flour
1 can (15 ounces) tomato puree
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
1 tablespoon garlic powder
1 cup beef broth
1 bag (28 ounces) hashbrowns with peppers and onions
1 can (14 ounces) carrots, drained
1 can (14 ounces) peas, drained
salt, to taste
pepper, to taste
1 sheet puff pastry, thawed
1 egg

Heat oven to 400 F.
In large skillet or Dutch oven, brown ground beef; drain and set aside.
Over medium heat, deglaze skillet with beer and whisk in flour. After thickening, whisk in tomato puree and add Worcestershire sauce. Mix in ground beef, garlic powder and beef broth. Add hashbrowns, carrots and peas. Season with salt and pepper, to taste. Simmer 20-25 minutes, stirring occasionally.
Place puff pastry sheet on cookie sheet. Beat egg and brush over pastry. Bake 10 minutes. Place hot puff pastry on top of beef mixture and serve.

Irish Sweet Soda Bread

Recipe courtesy of “Cookin’ Savvy”
Servings: 4-6

4 tablespoons butter, melted
1 cup sugar
1 1/2 cups buttermilk
4 cups self-rising flour
1 cup currants
2 tablespoons sanding sugar (optional)
coffee or tea, for serving (optional)

Heat oven to 375 F.
Mix melted butter and sugar then add buttermilk. Mix in flour and currants.
Flour hands and counter. Add sanding sugar to dough, if desired, and knead into ball.
Grease small Dutch oven or pie plate and bake 40 minutes. Serve with coffee or tea, if desired, or as a dessert.

Substitutions: Raisins can be used in place of currants.

collect?v=1&tid=UA 482330 7&cid=1955551e 1975 5e52 0cdb 8516071094cd&sc=start&t=pageview&dl=http%3A%2F%2Ftrack.familyfeatures.com%2F17368%2F9687&dt=SAVORY FAVORITES TO MAKE ST
SOURCE:
Culinary.net

The A Line Light-Rail Extension from Azusa to Pomona: A Significant Milestone for Public Transportation

https://stmdailynews.com/the-line-light-rail-extension-from-azusa-to-pomona-a-significant-milestone-for-public-transportation/

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

News

Advance Auto Parts to Close All California Stores Amid Restructuring Efforts

Published

5 days ago

March 10, 2025

Hal Machina

In a significant shift for the automotive retail landscape, Advance Auto Parts has announced plans to close all remaining locations in California by mid-March 2025. This decision is part of a larger restructuring initiative aimed at addressing ongoing financial struggles within the company. The announcement was made in November through a federal WARN notice, which provides affected employees with a minimum of 60 days’ notice to prepare for the impending job loss.

Advance Auto Parts

The ramifications of this closure will be profound, with more than 1,600 workers set to lose their jobs as Advance Auto Parts shuts down its remaining 137 stores across the state. The closures began in early February and will follow a broader consolidation strategy that impacts over 725 locations nationwide.

The decision to close these stores is largely driven by a significant downturn in consumer demand. According to the company, fewer drivers are opting for vehicle repairs, contributing to a challenging market environment. This trend was starkly illustrated in the company’s recent financial report, highlighting an operating loss of $820 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Shane O’Kelly, President and CEO of Advance Auto Parts, stated, “During 2024, we initiated transformative actions to reposition Advance for long-term success and value creation.” This statement underscores the urgency of the company’s restructuring efforts and its commitment to adapt to the market’s evolving landscape.

As part of its comprehensive plan, Advance Auto Parts intends to consolidate its distribution operations, reducing the number of centers to 12 larger facilities by the end of 2026. Furthermore, the company aims to open 60 market hub locations by mid-2027, which could potentially help streamline operations and improve efficiency in a challenging retail environment.

The closure of all California locations signifies a substantial change in the automotive parts sector, marking the end of an era for many consumers who have relied on Advance Auto Parts for their automotive needs. As the company navigates these changes, the goal remains clear: to emerge stronger and better positioned for sustainable growth in the years to come.

For employees and consumers alike, this transition brings uncertainty, but it also represents a critical phase of re-evaluation and adaptation in the face of shifting market demands. The coming months will be pivotal as Advance Auto Parts implements its restructuring plan while supporting its affected workforce.

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

News

Arizona Senate Passes Landmark Bill to Reform Housing Regulations

Published

7 days ago

March 8, 2025

Rod Washington

man in black shirt wearing yellow hard hat pushing barrow. Housing — Photo by Mikael Blomkvist on Pexels.com

In a significant move aimed at addressing the ongoing housing crisis in Arizona, the state Senate has passed Senate Bill 1229, a piece of legislation that could transform the way municipalities regulate home designs and development standards. This bipartisan bill passed on March 5, 2025, with a narrow vote of 16-13, attracting support from both Democrats and Republicans who are united in their objective to enhance housing affordability in the Grand Canyon State.

Key Provisions of Senate Bill 1229

One of the most notable aspects of SB 1229 is its proposal to prevent municipalities from mandating shared amenities that require a Homeowners Association (HOA) for maintenance. This change is seen as a step toward safeguarding homeowners’ rights to decide the features, structure, and design of their properties without being subjected to burdensome regulations.

Moreover, the bill aims to prohibit cities from requiring certain elements such as screening, walls, or fencing on residential properties. It will also establish boundaries on how cities can regulate lot sizes and building setbacks. These provisions are designed to empower homeowners and help make housing more accessible.

Addressing the Housing Crisis

The initiative comes in light of a severe housing crisis that has plagued Arizona, making homeownership increasingly elusive for many residents. The language within the bill highlights the ongoing struggle for citizens in obtaining affordable housing: “It has become virtually impossible for many citizens of this state to achieve the American Dream of owning their own home.”

Supporters assert that the current highly-restrictive regulations contribute to this crisis and that SB 1229 presents a commonsense solution for families, teachers, first responders, and young professionals who have found themselves priced out of the housing market.

Bipartisan Support and Community Impact

Notably, the bill garnered a rare coalition of support from both parties, with nine Republicans and seven Democrats voting in favor. This broad backing could play a crucial role in advancing the bill to the House, where it may have a better chance of avoiding a veto from Governor Katie Hobbs.

State Senator Shawnna Bolick, a Republican representing District 2, expressed that this new legislation is a much-needed remedy to the housing challenges faced by many Arizona families. She emphasized that it aims to help working-class citizens secure homes that meet their needs and budget.

Echoing these sentiments, Democratic Senator Analise Ortiz shared her own struggles in the current housing market. “At 31, I cannot afford to own a home where I was born and raised and currently govern,” she stated. Ortiz’s personal experience underscores the urgency for legislative changes that prioritize affordable housing options for all residents.

Conclusion

As Arizona grapples with a pervasive housing crisis, Senate Bill 1229 represents a pivotal step towards unlocking new possibilities for homeownership and easing regulatory burdens that have long stymied development. By promoting flexibility in housing regulations, this legislation aims to pave the way for a brighter future for countless residents seeking to realize their dream of homeownership in Arizona.

The upcoming discussions in the House will be crucial in determining the fate of this bill. As passionate advocates for housing reform continue to support this initiative, many Arizona residents will be watching closely to see how it unfolds.