On March 8 ICE arrested and detained Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Kahlil with intent to deport him, applying a provision in immigration law. This action at first blush is an attack on non-citizens who act in ways that expose them to threat of deportation. But the more dangerous threat is that this arrest is part of a broad assault on the autonomy of educational institutions in American society.

This is evident by two further actions of the federal government. One is a demand that Columbia reorganize its internal academic department structure. Another is a demand made to 60 colleges and universities.

Here is a thumbnail review:

Mahmoud Khalil, born in a refugee camp in Syria, moved to the U.S. in 2022 and became a legal permanent resident. He earned a master’s degree from Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs in December 2024.  While he was a student, he was a visible participant in anti-Isreal protests that included an encampment on campus in April and May 2024, He was arrested by ICE on March 8, 2025, under the personal order of  Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The legal grounds used by Rubio was a rarely used provision in immigration law, Section 237(a)(4)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which states that an alien is deportable if: “an alien whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States…”

This law is so rarely used that Kahlil’s attorney apparently cited only one instance in recent history of its use, which was an attempt to deport a former Mexican deputy general attorney. The case of Mario Salvador Ruiz-Massieu began in 1996. in 1999 a judge in U.S. Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals wrote that the law was unconstitutional because it violated basic due process protection guaranteed by the constitution. In another setting, none other than Donald Trump’s sister Maryann Trump Barry critiqued the law as unconstitutional.   In 2007, a case brought against eight alleged supporters of terrorism (the “LA 8”), was finally closed with no deportation, having been opened in 1987.

Kahlil’s case will likely go before an immigration court judge.  It seems to me likely that the administration will look to other rarely used emergency provisions in law to deport some one without judicial review.

The federal government has a larger target then a single graduate student. It has suspended $400 million in grants to Columbia. On March 13, the government wrote that the grants will be restored on the condition that Columbia undertake nine steps, including placing an academic department in “receivership” for five years, and down to requiring that masked students display their college ID on their clothing. These demands were made, per the government, due to Columbia’s failure to protect students and faculty from antisemitic violence and harassment.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights sent letters to 60 higher education institutions on March 10 demanding that they take specific steps to address antisemitism on campus. It cited Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.  I note that the government has not – yet – demanded that colleges submit information on students and faculty.  The demands on Colombia indicate the degree to which the government feels ready to bring higher education institutions into sustained micro-management..  The Department of Education, which sent the letter, referred to the suspension of grants to Columbia as a consequence of not resolving complaints of harassment.

A broader scenario is one in which the federal government seeks to uproot visages of campus-based DEI and rights of transgendered students, using the same tactics of grant withholding and demands for micro-management. A hypothetical case is one on which an athletic department of a college is attacked with a demand it be placed under receivership.

In his campaign Trump, such as in his “Agenda 47” vision, he talked about plans to  reshape university funding, compliance, and campus culture, particularly by enforcing stricter protest regulations and removing DEI-related initiatives. (Go here.)