Hamza Adam 
A federal immigration judge’s ruling on Friday that allowed the Trump administration to move forward with the deportation of former Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil was roundly criticized by legal observers stunned by the decision.
The ruling greenlighting the deportation of the 30-year-old legal U.S. resident came at the end of a hearing in Louisiana as Immigration Judge Jamee E. Comans concluded that the government “established by clear and convincing evidence that he is removable,” according to The Associated Press.
But not all were swayed by the judge’s legal reading of the case, which marked the first in a string of arrests at universities nationwide of students living in the U.S. as permanent residents in an escalation of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown.
“The fake judge (a DOJ Immigration Judge) ruled this, and he is only empowered to interpret immigration law, not the Constitution,” Cato Institute immigration expert David Bier wrote on X.
ALSO READ: Violent J6er who broke into Capitol announces run for Congress in East Texas
Civil rights attorney Scott Hechinger told his own X followers that it was “really critical to understand 2 things about the Mahmoud Khalil ruling.”
“1. Immigration judges are *not nominated & confirmed.* They are political appointees of the Executive. 2. Trump purged all immigration judges he didn’t like at the outset of his admin. They’re all pawns,” he said.
“I have a sinking feeling this ends with the Supreme Court ruling 6-3 that the executive branch has the power to make the determination Rubio did here,” New York Times journalist Lydia Polgreen warned on X.
“This ruling is a disappointing setback in what we unfortunately knew would be a long and unnecessary process,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal posted on social media Friday. “I continue to stand with Mahmoud Khalil and will fight to bring him home and for every person’s freedom of speech.”