Congress
Dems ask Trump admin to explain Khalil’s arrest, calling it ‘playbook of authoritarians’
More than 100 House Democrats on Friday sent a letter to top Trump officials, decrying the arrest of a former Columbia graduate student as an attack on the First Amendment and questioning the murky legal authority invoked by the administration.
The lawmakers, including authors Reps. Pramila Jayapal of Washington, Jamie Raskin of Maryland and Mary Gay Scanlon of Pennsylvania, addressed the letter to Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The letter, first obtained by Blue Light News, slams the use of a Cold War-era section of the Immigration and Nationality Act to deport Mahmoud Khalil as the “playbook of authoritarians.” The law was aimed at protecting national interests against potential foreign intervention.
The letter also calls on the administration to answer questions about its actions, including what “evidentiary grounds” Rubio has relied upon to conclude that Khalil’s presence in the United States threatens “serious adverse foreign policy consequences” — and what those foreign policy consequences might be.
The letter asks the administration to respond by March 27 with answers, as well as documents, including legal memoranda, that explain the administration’s findings.
“The deployment of a dusty old statutory section to punish speech is a dangerous attack on both the First Amendment and on all, including lawful permanent residents, who enjoy its protection,” the letter states. “This maneuver evokes the Alien and Sedition Acts and McCarthyism. It is the playbook of authoritarians, not of elected officials in a democratic society who claim to be the champions of free speech.”
Khalil, a Palestinian graduate student who played a central role in campus protests at Columbia University over the Israel-Hamas war, was arrested over the weekend — marking a significant shift in the U.S. government’s use of its immigration enforcement powers. Khalil is a permanent resident with a green card, but was taken into Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody as President Donald Trump promised more such arrests are coming.
The administration has argued that the protests are antisemitic, and some Jewish students have reported feeling threatened by the demonstrations on college campuses against Israel’s attacks on Gaza. The administration has accused Khalil of leading “activities aligned to Hamas,” but has not provided specific evidence — nor has he been charged or convicted of any crimes.
The administration is relying on a provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 — a rarely invoked authority that allows Rubio to expel foreigners. The provision, which is set to be tested in the courts, says that any “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 is deportable.”
Khalil’s detainment sparked outrage from activists, free speech groups and several Democrats. A judge has halted his deportation, but his fate remains uncertain as the arrest raises a number of legal questions, including significant constitutional ones.
“Weaponizing the immigration system to crush and chill protected free speech puts our nation on the side of authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping,” the Democrats wrote. “We urge you to turn back before you suffer another stinging loss in court and visit terrible damage on the country.”
Congress
Mace sued for defamation by man she accused of abuse in floor speech
Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) is facing a defamation lawsuit filed by one of the four men she has publicly accused of sexual abuse in a floor speech, in a case that could test the legal protections members of Congress have for their official conduct.
The South Carolinian took to the House floor last month to accuse her ex-fiance, Charleston businessman Patrick Bryant, and three other men of rape, sex trafficking and nonconsensually filming sex acts with her and others.
Now Brian Musgrave, one of the other men Mace named on the House floor, is suing the member of Congress for defamation.
In the lawsuit, filed in federal court in South Carolina, he categorically denied the allegations leveled against him by Mace — saying he was not present during any alleged events Mace described and did not “film” or “incapacitate” anyone — adding she “and her team destroyed the lives” of Musgrave and his family.
The suit seeks an unspecified award for compensatory and punitive damages to be determined by a jury “sufficient to impress upon the Defendant the seriousness of her conduct and to deter such similar conduct in the future.”
Mace’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The legal action also seeks to carve out an exception from the speech or debate clause of the Constitution, which provides a legal shield for members of Congress for acts taken as part of their roles as lawmakers, including “any Speech or Debate in either House.”
The clause “does not transform the floor of Congress into a sanctuary for defamation, nor does it protect Congresswoman Mace’s extra-Congressional defamatory statements surrounding her speech,” Musgrave’s suit asserts.
His lawsuit also points to some of Mace’s actions outside the House floor, including a draft of the speech circulating and posts on social media.
In her February speech, Mace claimed she was speaking out because South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson had declined to act upon evidence of abuse that she said she provided. But the top state prosecutor said Mace’s accusations of improper conduct by his office were “categorically false,” claiming the office had “no knowledge” of Mace’s alleged assault until her speech on the House floor.
Wilson and Mace are both considering bids for South Carolina governor in the state’s 2026 election.
Shortly after Mace’s public speech, the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division confirmed that it is investigating Bryant. Bryant has categorically denied Mace’s allegations.
Congress
Jeffries stays silent on Schumer’s future as Senate leader
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries sidestepped a question about the leadership of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer — a stunning demonstration of the breach that has emerged between the two New York Democrats over a looming government shutdown.
“Next question,” Jeffries told reporters when asked if there should be new leadership in the Senate. He also declined to answer a question on whether he had confidence in Schumer and said that while he’d been in touch with his fellow leader, their conversations would “remain private.”
Schumer said Thursday he planned to vote to advance a GOP-written funding patch to avert a shutdown, which is said was the better of two bad options.
“It is a false choice that Donald Trump, Elon Musk and House Republicans have been presenting, between their reckless and partisan spending bill and a government shutdown,” Jeffries responded Friday. “We do not support a bill that is designed to hurt the American people.”
When asked whether Schumer had acquiesced to Trump, Jeffries said there was still time — the vote had not taken place yet, and some senators were still undeclared, he added.
Congress
Mark Kelly ditches his Tesla
Amid the Friday chaos on Capitol Hill, Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) took to X to announce … he’s getting rid of his Tesla.
“This is going to be my last trip in this car,” Kelly said in a video posted to his social media.
The Arizona Democrat wrote the car felt like “a rolling billboard” advertising Elon Musk. The chainsaw-wielding special adviser to the president has spearheaded the Department of Government Efficiency’s shuttering of agencies and mass firings across the government. He’s also Tesla’s CEO.
Kelly said he couldn’t drive the car without thinking about the damage DOGE has brought on the government, including the firing of veterans.
“Elon Musk kind of turned out to be an asshole, and I don’t want to drive a car built and designed by an asshole,” Kelly said.
Earlier this week, President Donald Trump decided to buy his own Tesla, setting up a collection of the electric cars for his selection at the White House after protests broke out across the country at Tesla dealerships.
Following the car show, Senate Democrats sent a letter to the U.S. Office of Government Ethics asking the office to open an investigation, saying Musk and Trump used their roles to promote Musk’s company with their “temporary Tesla showroom.”
-
The Josh Fourrier Show4 months ago
DOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Economy4 months ago
Fed moves to protect weakening job market with bold rate cut
-
Uncategorized4 months ago
Johnson plans to bring House GOP short-term spending measure to House floor Wednesday
-
Economy4 months ago
It’s still the economy: What TV ads tell us about each campaign’s closing message
-
Politics4 months ago
RFK Jr.’s bid to take himself off swing state ballots may scramble mail-in voting
-
Politics4 months ago
How Republicans could foil Harris’ Supreme Court plans if she’s elected
-
Politics4 months ago
What 7 political experts will be watching at Tuesday’s debate