On March 4, 2025, President Trump stated on social media, "All Federal Funding will STOP for any College, School, or University that allows illegal protests. Agitators will be imprisoned/or permanently sent back to the country from which they came."
On March 9, 2025—less than a week later—Mahmoud Khalil, a recent graduate of Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs, was arrested in his campus residence by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Department of Homeland Security announced that the arrest was executed "in support of President Trump's executive orders prohibiting anti-Semitism" and alleged that Khalil had engaged in "activities aligned to Hamas, a designated terrorist organization," through his participation in protests opposing the war in Gaza. Khalil remains in custody and faces threat of deportation despite his apparent green-card status and the absence of any criminal charges. On March 10, 2025, the Hon. Jesse M. Furman of the United States District Court for the District of New York issued an order barring the government from removing Khalil from the United States pending a further order from the court. Following Judge Furman's March 19, 2025 order, Khalil's habeas petition for release from ICE custody survived the government's motion to dismiss and is pending transfer to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. [See Khalil v. Joyce et al., No. 1:25CV01935 (SDNY 2025); Khalil v. Joyce et al., No. 3:25-CV-01963 (DNJ 2025)].
In a March 10 social media post, President Trump warned that Khalil is only the first of many students who will be detained and potentially deported.1
On March 13, 2025, Khalil and seven other students filed a lawsuit in federal court in the Southern District of New York against Columbia University and Barnard College (collectively, "the University"). The lawsuit raises First Amendment and breach of contract claims. [See Khalil et al. v. The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York et al., No. 1:25-CV-02079 (SDNY 2025)].The complaint alleges that the University complied with unlawful demands from the US House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce (the "Committee") to disclose thousands of student disciplinary records, including personally identifiable information, as outlined in the February 13 demand letter. The letter is described as vague, overbroad, and predicated on viewpoint-based discrimination. The complaint further asserts that this action represents an attempt by Congress to use the University as a vehicle to undermine the student body's First Amendment rights of speech, expression, and association. Moreover, the complaint alleges that the University breached "specific promises and assertions to all Plaintiffs regarding diversity, freedom of speech, academic freedom, and good faith and fair dealing," as set forth in its contracts, manuals, and various verbal and written assertions by authorized representatives. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief, permanently enjoining Congress from compelling the University to provide disciplinary records and stopping the University from further complying with the Committee's February 13 demand letter. They also seek a declaratory judgment to clarify the parties' rights and legal relations.
Furthermore, since at least the Bush Administration, ICE has recognized schools as unique private spaces that should not be subject to intrusion absent a national security risk.2However, the risk of ICE enforcement occurring on college campuses has, needless to say, shifted significantly with this administration, particularly given the rescission by then-acting DHS Administrator Benjamine Huffman of the Biden Administration's 2021 "Guidelines for Enforcement Actions in or Near Protected Areas" memorandum on January 20. In light of these events, institutions of higher education (IHEs) should consider adding "navigating the increasing risk of ICE enforcement on campus" to the list of competing priorities. As a starting point, we offer the following recommendations for how to prepare for future ICE activity on campus:
- Consult with legal counsel to ensure that the institution's
policies, protocols, and preparedness plans for interactions with
ICE clearly outline your constituents' rights and
obligations.
- Educate students, faculty, and staff on these policies and
protocols. Consider whether to provide additional training to
certain individuals based on their roles, such as residence hall
advisors, faculty residential advisors, or campus security.
- Identify school officials designated to assist with ICE
interactions and authorized to act on behalf of the institution
(g., to accept service of warrant, subpoena, or request).
IHEs may wish to designate campus security, senior administrators,
and/or school counsel to engage with ICE.
- Ensure that students, faculty, and staff know whom to contact
and how to reach them, including during evenings, weekends, and
school breaks.
- Consider updating campus security protocols, including points
of access and egress and public signage that clearly identifies
private areas on campus.
- Monitor student protests closely so that any truly
non-compliant or illegal conduct during such protests is handled at
the institutional or local enforcement level before it elevates to
an ICE concern.
- IHEs may ask that ICE agents provide their identities,
credentials, and a valid judicial warrant for any search and
seizure in a non-public space. A valid judicial warrant is one
issued by a federal court and signed by a federal judge, which
specifies the time, location, and targets of the search or
seizure.
- If ICE agents present a judicial warrant, IHEs may have a designated official examine and make a copy of the warrant, accompanying the agents to ensure that their execution of the warrant is consistent with its terms.
- If ICE agents do not have a judicial warrant, IHEs are
not required to consent to their entry into any non-public
space, absent exigent circumstances.
- If ICE agents assert that there are exigent circumstances
meriting a warrantless search (g., an urgent national
security or public safety threat), IHE personnel should not
interfere with their attempts to access non-public areas.
- ICE agents may present a "Blackie's
warrant," which is a civil judicial warrant issued by a
magistrate judge (see Blackie's House of Beef,
Inc. v. Castillo, 659 F.2d 1211 (DC Cir. 1981)). A
Blackie's warrant authorizes immigration agents to
enter private commercial premises without consent for the
purpose of searching out a suspected violation of immigration laws.
To be valid, a Blackie's warrant and accompanying
affidavit must set forth a plausible basis for believing that there
are deportable noncitizens present at a location. It should
describe with specificity the location, time, and scope of the
search, but it does not need to name or describe the individuals
sought. Importantly, a Blackie's warrant may not be
used to search residential premises or to seize
property.
- If ICE agents present a Blackie's warrant, IHEs
may have a designated official examine and make a copy of
the warrant, accompanying the agents to ensure that their execution
of the warrant is consistent with its terms. IHE officials should
not interfere with their attempts to access non-public areas
pursuant to a Blackie's.
- If ICE agents present a Blackie's warrant, IHEs
may have a designated official examine and make a copy of
the warrant, accompanying the agents to ensure that their execution
of the warrant is consistent with its terms. IHE officials should
not interfere with their attempts to access non-public areas
pursuant to a Blackie's.
- ICE agents may also present an administrative arrest
warrant or administrative removal warrant, which are
issued by immigration authorities such as ICE or US Customs and
Border Protection (CBP) rather than by a court. Removal is the
process by which a noncitizen is deported from the United States
for violating immigration law. An administrative arrest occurs when
ICE arrests a noncitizen for civil violations of US immigration
laws, such as those outlined in the Immigration and Nationality
Act.
- If ICE agents present an administrative arrest or removal
warrant, IHEs are not required to authorize their entry to
non-public areas. However, ICE agents may execute lawfully obtained
administrative arrest or removal warrants if they locate the named
person in a public location where there is no reasonable
expectation of privacy.
- IHEs are not required to provide information about any
named individuals to ICE agents. Be mindful of your obligations
under the Federal Educational Rights Protection Act (FERPA), which
provides that a school official may only disclose student education
records without prior written consent, pursuant to limited
exceptions. These include: 1) when it is necessary to comply with a
court order or lawfully issued subpoena (subject to applicable
notice requirements); or 2) when there is an "articulable and
significant threat to the health or safety of a student or other
individuals," and providing the records to ICE is necessary to
protect against that threat.
- IHEs are not required to provide ICE agents with any
information about whether any named individuals are present on your
institution's premises.
- IHEs are entitled to ensure that any search or seizure by ICE
is carried out lawfully. However, you should not obstruct
or otherwise interfere with ICE's efforts, including attempts
to access non-public areas (g., by hiding anyone,
providing false or misleading information, or destroying/discarding
relevant documents or electronically stored information). Such
actions may be unlawful and subject to prosecution.
- Following any interactions with ICE, it is important to
document all relevant details in writing, including:
- Date, time, location, and institutional personnel
present/involved
- Name, badge number, and contact information of ICE
agent(s)
- Copies of information provided by ICE (g.,
warrants or legal documents)
- Description of any information provided to ICE
- Date, time, location, and institutional personnel
present/involved
- In the event of any ICE arrests, IHEs may:
- Notify the detained person's emergency contact person of
the arrest
- Use ICE's website to locate any detained person
in ICE custody (or CBP custody for 48 hours or more)
- Contact the detained person to provide support
- Notify the detained person's emergency contact person of
the arrest
Steptoe will be closely monitoring these developments and providing ongoing updates. We are available to help with your institution's risk assessment and to provide compliance advice as you navigate this complex and rapidly changing landscape. For relevant updates, please refer to Steptoe's Education Publications.
Footnotes
1. Indeed, on March 8, 2025 ICE made another arrest, this time of Georgetown University postdoctoral associate, Badar Khan Suri, for allegedly "spreading Hamas propaganda." As with Khalil, though no criminal charges have been filed against Suri, he faces threats of deportation. Suri's writ of habeas corpus and complaint challenging his detention remains pending before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, and on March 20, 2025, Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles ordered that Suri "shall not be removed from the United States unless and until the Court issues a contrary order." [Suri v. Trump et al, 1:25-CV-00480 (EDVA 2025)]
2. See IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, Enforcement Actions at or Focused on Sensitive Locations, Oct. 24, 2011, https://www.ice.gov/doclib/ero-outreach/pdf/10029.2-policy.pdf.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
