UPDATE 1-Court won't revisit ruling, opening door to pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil's rearrest

Baher Azmy, a lawyer for Khalil at the Center for Constitutional Rights, in a statement vowed to ask ⁠the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Khalil's case and overturn the 3rd Circuit's "dangerous" decision. “That ruling greenlights ⁠holding someone in ⁠prolonged, brutal detention conditions without access to meaningful judicial review in order to punish them and deter others from dissenting from U.S. foreign ‌policy," he ‌said.

A divided ​federal appeals court on Friday declined ‌to ​reconsider a ruling in Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil's case that opened the door to President Donald Trump's administration re-arresting ‌and deporting the pro-Palestinian activist. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on a 6-5 vote rejected Khalil's request to revisit a ruling a 2-1 panel of the Philadelphia-based court delivered ‌in January that had concluded a lower-court judge had no jurisdiction to order his ‌release from immigration detention last year.

He was among the most prominent of a number of foreign students detained last year by immigration authorities after engaging in pro-Palestinian activism on their college campuses as part of ⁠a broad ​effort by the ⁠Trump administration. Six judges appointed by Republican presidents were in the majority, while five Democratic appointees voted to ⁠rehear the case, including U.S. Circuit Judge Cheryl Ann Krause, who said the court's decision handcuffed ​the judiciary's ability to protect the civil liberties of non-citizens like Khalil.

"We cannot ⁠fulfill that role if we write ourselves out of relevance and leave the Executive Branch to check itself," ⁠wrote Krause, ​who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama. Baher Azmy, a lawyer for Khalil at the Center for Constitutional Rights, in a statement vowed to ask ⁠the U.S. Supreme Court to hear Khalil's case and overturn the 3rd Circuit's "dangerous" decision.

“That ruling greenlights ⁠holding someone in ⁠prolonged, brutal detention conditions without access to meaningful judicial review in order to punish them and deter others from dissenting from U.S. foreign ‌policy," he ‌said.