Fact Check: Judge Farbiarz Ruled the McCarthy-era Law Likely Unconstitutional
What We Know
Judge Michael E. Farbiarz of the U.S. District Court for New Jersey ruled that the legal grounds cited by the Trump administration to detain Mahmoud Khalil, a pro-Palestinian activist, were likely unconstitutional. This ruling stemmed from the invocation of a rarely used McCarthy-era law by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who claimed Khalil posed a threat to U.S. foreign policy goals related to antisemitism (source-1, source-2). Judge Farbiarz indicated that the law invoked was likely unconstitutional and that Khalil's continued detention on these grounds could not be justified (source-4, source-5).
Khalil has been detained since March 2025, despite not being formally charged with any crime. His lawyers argue that the allegations against him are retaliatory actions for his First Amendment activities, specifically his pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Columbia University (source-1, source-6).
Analysis
The ruling by Judge Farbiarz is significant as it highlights the tension between national security claims and constitutional rights. The judge's assertion that the law invoked by Rubio is likely unconstitutional raises questions about the government's ability to detain individuals based on vague national security concerns without clear evidence of wrongdoing (source-4, source-7).
Critics of the administration's actions, including Khalil's legal team, argue that the detention is a form of political retaliation against his activism, which is protected under the First Amendment. The judge's comments about the lack of substantial legal grounds for Khalil's detention suggest a judicial recognition of the potential misuse of immigration laws for political purposes (source-2, source-6).
The sources used in this analysis are credible, including major news organizations such as The New York Times and NPR, which have established reputations for thorough reporting. However, it is essential to note that the political context surrounding this case may influence how different outlets report on the issue, potentially introducing bias.
Conclusion
The claim that Judge Farbiarz ruled the McCarthy-era law cited by the Trump administration to detain Khalil was likely unconstitutional is True. The judge's ruling reflects a significant judicial pushback against the use of vague national security claims to justify detention, particularly in cases involving political activism. The implications of this ruling extend beyond Khalil's case, potentially affecting how similar cases are handled in the future.
Sources
- Blocked by Judge, U.S. Shifts Rationale for Detaining ... New York Times
- Federal judge says he could release Mahmoud Khalil as ... NPR
- Judge won't order release of pro-Palestinian activist ... Politico
- Mahmoud Khalil will remain in detention, despite judge's ... Forward
- Judge rules Mahmoud Khalil can't be deported or detained ... CBS News
- Judge orders Trump administration to release Mahmoud ... Middle East Monitor
- Judge rules Trump cannot use foreign policy claim to ... Al Jazeera
- Judge denies Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil's request ... ABC News
