MANHATTAN — The 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 2025 district court ruling that ordered the release of Mohsen Mahdawi from immigration detention. The appeals court ruled that US District Judge Geoffrey Crawford lacked jurisdiction to hear the case because it should have been resolved in immigration court first.

The three-judge panel issued a unanimous decision ordering the district judge to dismiss Mahdawi's lawsuit challenging his detention. The panel did not order Mahdawi's re-arrest as part of its ruling. The decision marked a reversal of the lower court's finding that Mahdawi should be released while his immigration case proceeded.

Mohsen Mahdawi is a 35-year-old student at Columbia University who was born in the West Bank. He is a lawful permanent resident of the United States and became a legal permanent resident in 2015. Mahdawi lives in the Upper Valley region.

He was arrested in April 2025 in Colchester, Vermont, while attending a US citizenship interview. Following his arrest, Mahdawi was detained for two weeks before US District Judge Geoffrey Crawford ordered him released on bond in April 2025.

Judge Crawford ruled that Mahdawi enjoyed the same First Amendment free speech rights as US citizens. In his order, Crawford accused the Trump administration of causing 'great harm' to someone who had committed no crime. The Board of Immigration Appeals reinstated deportation proceedings against Mahdawi in May 2025.

Prior to that reinstatement, immigration judge Nina Froes had blocked the Trump administration's attempt to deport Mahdawi in February 2025. Froes ruled that the government failed to meet its burden of proof and dismissed key evidence as inadmissible. Mahdawi has remained out of custody while fighting deportation and has not been charged with a crime.

Mahdawi was participating in demonstrations against Israel's military campaign in Gaza prior to his arrest. Trump administration officials justified Mahdawi's arrest by claiming his pro-Palestinian activism could undermine peacemaking deals in the Middle East. The administration argued that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has the authority under federal immigration law to seek the deportation of non-citizens whose presence could have 'adverse foreign policy consequences' for the US. US immigration courts are overseen by the Justice Department.

The American Civil Liberties Union is representing Mohsen Mahdawi. Attorneys for the ACLU said the government could not detain or deport their client as the appeals process proceeds. The three-judge panel that issued the ruling included two judges appointed by Donald Trump in his first term and one judge appointed by George W. Bush.

Mahdawi responded to the ruling in a statement, calling the appeals court decision "a grave setback." He said the government is trying to punish and deport him, a stateless Palestinian refugee from the occupied West Bank, because it opposes his peaceful advocacy for human dignity and equal rights for Palestinians. He added that the decision would hand the government "the power to intimidate, censor, and punish dissent without meaningful restraint." He said he remains unafraid and faithful that justice will prevail in America and in Palestine.

The case parallels legal proceedings involving Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate and former classmate of Mahdawi. The 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals reached a similar conclusion earlier in 2026 in the case of Khalil. Khalil spent more than 100 days in immigration detention before his release on bond by a federal judge in New Jersey. He has asked the US Supreme Court to review the 3rd Circuit's conclusion.

The ruling reinforces the principle that federal district courts lack jurisdiction to review immigration detention orders when those matters are pending in immigration courts, which are overseen by the Justice Department. The decision aligns with a broader judicial trend limiting judicial review of immigration removal orders, as seen in the 3rd Circuit's earlier ruling in the Khalil case. The outcome affects how courts handle detention challenges for lawful permanent residents facing deportation based on foreign policy considerations rather than criminal charges.