A US federal appeals court has upheld the release of Badar Khan Suri, a Georgetown University scholar facing deportation for his pro-Palestinian activism, in a ruling that deepens a legal conflict likely to reach the Supreme Court. In a 2-1 decision, the Virginia-based Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that federal immigration law did not prevent a lower court judge from ordering Khan Suri's release, and rejected the Trump administration's attempt to move the case from Virginia to Texas — a jurisdiction seen as more favourable to the government.

Khan Suri, an Indian citizen and postdoctoral researcher at Georgetown University in Washington DC, was arrested in March 2025 as part of the Trump administration's broader campaign to detain and deport foreign nationals who had engaged in pro-Palestinian activism on American college campuses. The appeals court sided with his argument that his detention violated his due process and free speech rights under the US Constitution. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is helping to represent him, welcomed the ruling, with its Virginia legal director accusing Immigration and Customs Enforcement of moving Khan Suri through five facilities across three states in what she called a deliberate attempt to find a more sympathetic court.

The ruling stands in contrast to two other recent appellate decisions that went against pro-Palestinian activists. On Tuesday, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York overturned a Vermont judge's order releasing Mohsen Mahdawi, a 35-year-old Palestinian-born Columbia University student who was arrested during a citizenship interview in April 2025. A separate appellate panel earlier reached a similar conclusion in the case of Mahmoud Khalil, another Columbia University student and Palestinian rights advocate. In both cases, the courts found that the lower court judges had overstepped their authority by intervening before the cases had fully moved through the immigration court system — though neither panel ruled on whether the activists had been unconstitutionally targeted for their political views. Khalil remains free while he appeals to the Supreme Court.

To pursue these deportations, the Trump administration has relied on a rarely invoked provision of immigration law that grants the Secretary of State authority to remove individuals deemed to pose adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States. Critics, including the ACLU, argue this amounts to unconstitutional suppression of political speech, a charge the government contests.

With appeals courts now split — one siding with a detained scholar and two siding with the administration — the Supreme Court is widely expected to intervene and issue a definitive ruling. The court's nine justices include a six-to-three conservative majority, three of whom were appointed by President Trump. Any ruling would likely set a landmark precedent defining the constitutional rights of non-citizens residing in the United States, including the extent to which they are protected by the First Amendment's free speech guarantees.