The stock market these days feels like an unpredictable roller coaster ride, while events like Iran inching toward nuclear capability and the tantalizing prospect of a cease-fire between Russia and Ukraine swirl in the background. Despite these global issues, this week’s conversation across the U.S. seems oddly fixated on something else entirely: the protests surrounding Mahmoud Khalil, a former Columbia University student and a noncitizen facing deportation.
It’s a curious shift in focus, considering most Americans are much more concerned with their financial well-being and the broader stability of global affairs—whether it’s keeping China in check, ensuring peace in the Middle East, or resolving the bloodshed in Eastern Europe. Yet here we are, caught up in the fate of a Syrian national and Algerian citizen who was at the forefront of last year’s pro-Hamas demonstrations at Columbia University. With such a diversion from pressing issues, it’s not surprising that a mere 31% of Americans currently express a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence in the media, according to recent Gallup polls.
When it comes to Khalil, he’s hardly a sympathetic figure in the public eye. The New York Times even labeled him the “public face of protest against Israel” within the university community. He played a leading role in a student group called Columbia University Apartheid Divest, which disturbingly hailed Hamas’ attack on Israelis in October 2023 as a “moral, military, and political victory,” and called for what they describe as the “total eradication of Western civilization.”
Crucially, Khalil does not hold U.S. citizenship. He is a green card holder—a legal alien, if you will. His right to remain on U.S. soil hinges on the consent of “We the People.” If that consent is withdrawn, deportation becomes a possibility.
Sovereignty includes the power to decide who stays and who goes. As Emer de Vattel outlined in his influential 1758 treatise, “The Law of Nations,” this authority is comprehensive: a nation can bar individuals from entering or staying if deemed advantageous for the state. The late Justice Antonin Scalia echoed this sentiment by indicating that due process doesn’t grant aliens the right to enter or remain if the national consensus objects.
The rule is straightforward: anyone on a tourist visa or holding a green card who violates their terms can be ejected from the country. Khalil, as a foreign national, appears to have crossed a line by endorsing a State Department-designated terrorist group and aligning with a cause advocating nothing less than the downfall of Western civilization. Should America lose the ability to deport such individuals with radical beliefs, it risks undermining its own sovereignty.
Khalil’s case brings to light three potent anti-Western ideologies. First, there’s the “woke” perspective: Khalil represented a group with neo-Marxist views that categorize Israel as an oppressor. Secondly, there’s the Islamist angle, given CUAD’s backing of Sunni Islamist factions like Hamas. Lastly, the global neoliberal viewpoint emerges, where some advocates minimize the distinction between citizens and noncitizens, dreaming of a borderless world akin to the vision in John Lennon’s “Imagine.”
The controversy around Khalil’s detention certainly extends beyond his individual case. Recently, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats shared a post demanding, “Free Mahmoud Khalil.” However, it’s more than just Khalil’s freedom they seek. At its core, this movement challenges the very principles of Western civilization itself.
Josh Hammer, author of “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West,” provides his insights in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. If you’d like to explore more, follow him @josh_hammer.
