Martin and Margulies: The Khalil Case and the Difference Lawful Permanent Resident Status Makes

Immigration law profs Peter Margulies and David A. Martin have this to say on Lawfare about the Mahmoud Khalil case, the lawful permanent resident facing removal on foreign policy grounds.   The bottom line:  “Without a clear statement from Congress signaling that this broad authority extends to LPRs, courts should hold that LPRs are beyond the provision’s scope.”   In their view, the government’s attempt to remove Khalil “is a marked departure from long-standing law and practice. Immigration officials have not claimed that Khalil . . . has engaged in unlawful conduct. Rather, officials have invoked a rarely used provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(4)(C), that renders a noncitizen removable when the secretary of state has found that his or her continued presence creates `potentially serious’ risks for U.S. foreign policy.”

KJ