

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

James Freedland, ACLU national, (212) 519-7829 or 549-2666; media@aclu.org
Christopher Ott, ACLU of Massachusetts, (617) 482-3170 x322; cott@aclum.org
A
federal court today ruled that it has the power to review whether the
Bush administration has a valid reason for denying a visa to respected
South African scholar Adam Habib. The decision comes in a lawsuit
brought by the American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Massachusetts
challenging the State Department's refusal to grant Professor Habib a
visa based on unsubstantiated national security claims. Habib remains
banned from the country and unable to attend speaking engagements in
the United States.
"Today's ruling reaffirms that the Bush administration cannot
manipulate immigration laws to silence critics of U.S. government
policy and then shield their actions from scrutiny by the courts. The
government cannot cherry pick whose voices we are allowed to hear,"
said Melissa Goodman, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security
Project who argued the case in court. "As the court recognized, the
government cannot bar Professor Habib from speaking in the U.S. without
any explanation or substantiation whatsoever. Today's decision is a
major victory for judicial review and a significant blow to the
administration's failed attempt at stifling debate by banning a
prominent critic of U.S. policy."
Judge George A. O'Toole, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts ruled that the First Amendment requires the
government to provide a valid, substantiated reason for excluding a
scholar invited to speak to U.S. audiences. Writing that "the
government has not given a reason for the denial," Judge O'Toole
allowed the ACLU's challenge to move forward. In late 2007, the State
Department refused Habib a visa after months of inaction, claiming that
he is barred because he has "engaged in terrorist activities," but the
government failed to explain the basis for its accusation, let alone
provide any evidence to prove it.
Habib is a renowned scholar, sought-after political analyst, and Deputy
Vice-Chancellor of Research, Innovation and Advancement at the
University of Johannesburg. He is also a Muslim who has been a vocal
critic of the war in Iraq and some U.S. terrorism-related policies.
Habib has repeatedly condemned terrorism but urged governments to
respond to the terror threat with policies that are consistent with
human rights norms and the rule of law. Until the government suddenly
revoked his visa without explanation in October 2006, he never
experienced any trouble entering the U.S.; in fact, Habib lived in New
York with his family for years while earning a Ph.D. in political
science from the City University of New York.
The October 2006 revocation of Professor Habib's visa prevented him
from attending a series of meetings with representatives from the
National Institutes for Health, the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the World Bank, Columbia University and the Gates
Foundation. When he landed in New York, Habib was detained for seven
hours and interrogated about his associations and political views.
Armed guards eventually escorted him to a plane and deported him back
to South Africa. The State Department later revoked the visas of
Professor Habib's wife and two small children, again without
explanation. In May 2007, Habib applied for a new visa that would allow
him to travel to the U.S. to attend speaking engagements.
The ACLU filed this lawsuit in September 2007, charging that the
government's exclusion of Professor Habib amounts to censorship at the
border because it prevents U.S. citizens and residents from hearing
speech that is protected by the First Amendment. The ACLU brought this
case on behalf of organizations that have invited Professor Habib to
speak in the U.S., including the American Sociological Association, the
American Association of University Professors, the American-Arab
Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Boston Coalition for Palestinian
Rights. Habib has missed several of these events as a result of his
visa denial.
"We are gratified that the court ruled that this case can go forward,"
said Sally T. Hillsman, Executive Officer of the American Sociological
Association. "The government's actions have already prevented Professor
Habib from attending two American Sociological Association conferences.
We believe that the global exchange of knowledge is vital to the
advancement of science and we are hopeful that the today's ruling will
facilitate the free exchange of ideas."
Professor Habib's exclusion is part of a larger pattern. Over the past
few years, numerous foreign scholars, human rights activists and
writers - all vocal critics of U.S. policy - have been barred from the
U.S. without explanation or on vague national security grounds. In
2006, the ACLU filed a similar lawsuit on behalf of U.S. academic
groups and Professor Tariq Ramadan, a widely respected Swiss scholar of
the Muslim world. When the government revoked his visa in 2004,
Professor Ramadan was prevented from assuming a tenured teaching
position at the University of Notre Dame. The ACLU's case is currently
pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit;
Ramadan remains excluded from the U.S. to this day.
Attorneys in the case are Goodman, Jameel Jaffer and Judy Rabinovitz of
the ACLU, and Sarah Wunsch and John Reinstein of the ACLU of
Massachusetts.
More information about ideological exclusion - including a podcast with
Adam Habib, plaintiff statements in support of Habib, and today's
decision - is available at: www.aclu.org/exclusion
The American Civil Liberties Union was founded in 1920 and is our nation's guardian of liberty. The ACLU works in the courts, legislatures and communities to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to all people in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
(212) 549-2666"I feel very confident that he can do a very good job," Trump said of Mamdani after their White House meeting. "I think he is going to surprise some conservative people, actually.”
While Gothamist's characterization of Friday's White House meeting between President Donald Trump and New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani as "a surprising bromance" was likely an overstretch, the far-right US leader did offer copious praise for the democratic socialist during their amiable encounter.
Asked by a reporter if he would feel comfortable living in New York City under Mamdani, Trump—with Mamdani standing beside him in the Oval Office—replied: “Yeah, I would. I really would. Especially after the meeting."
“We agree on a lot more than I thought," the president continued. "I want him to do a great job, and we’ll help him do a great job.”
Asked by another reporter if he was standing next to a “jihadist"—as Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) called Mamdani over his support for Palestinian liberation and opposition to Israel's genocide in Gaza—Trump said, “No... I met with a man who is a very rational person."
"I met with a man who really wants to see New York be great again," the president added. "I think you’re going to have, hopefully, a really great mayor. The better he does, the happier I am. And we’re going to be helping him to make everybody’s dream come true. Having a strong and very safe New York.”
Comparing Mamdani to another prominent democratic socialist, who represents Vermont in the US Senate, Trump added that "Bernie Sanders and I agreed on much more than people thought."
The pair reportedly discussed contentious issues including Trump's anti-immigrant crackdown and federal invasion of several US cities including Los Angeles; Washington, DC; Portland, Maine; Chicago; and Memphis.
However, they also discussed common-ground issues including the affordability crisis, which has hit New Yorkers particularly hard.
"It was a productive meeting focused on a place of shared admiration and love, which is New York City and the need to deliver affordability to New Yorkers," Mamdani told reporters.
Friday's friendly meeting was a stark departure from previous acrimonious exchanges between Trump and Mamdani. The president has called Mamdani a "communist lunatic” and a “total nut job," and repeatedly threatened to cut off federal funding to the nation's largest city if the leftist was elected. Trump also threatened to arrest Mamdani after the then-mayoral candidate said he would refuse to cooperate with his administration's mass deportation campaign.
Asked Friday about calling Mamdani a communist, Trump said: “He’s got views that are a little out there, but who knows. I mean, we’re going to see what works. He’s going to change, also. I changed a lot."
"I feel very confident that he can do a very good job," the president added. "I think he is going to surprise some conservative people, actually.”
For his part, Mamdani has called Trump a "despot" and the embodiment of New York City's problems, decried his "authoritarian" administration, and called himself the president's "worst nightmare." He also called Trump a "fascist" on numerous occasions.
"I've been called much worse than a despot,” Trump quipped Friday.
After their meeting, a reporter asked Mamdani if he still thought Trump is a fascist. The president interrupted as Mamdani began to respond, patting him on the arm and saying, “That’s OK, you can just say yes."
Mamdani did not compliment Trump nearly as much as the president—who posted several photos in which he posed with the mayor-elect before a portrait of President Franklin D. Roosevelt—lavished praise upon him.
Let’s be clear. @zohrankmamdani.bsky.social got Trump so charmed that Trump posted two photos of the two of them with Franklin Roosevelt’s portrait behind them AND one of just Mamdani and FDR’s portrait.
[image or embed]
— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) November 21, 2025 at 4:52 PM
Mamdani called the meeting "cordial and productive," and said that he looked forward to working with Trump to "improve life in New York," highlighting their agreement on issues like housing affordability, food and energy costs, and reducing the cost of living—issues which he said motivated voters to support both men.
Observers expressed surprise over the affable meeting, with Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.)—one of Trump's staunchest congressional critics—asking on social media, "What the heck just happened?"
The meeting proceeded far differently than previewed by Fox News:
Numerous far-right figures were furious at Trump's genial reception of a man they've spent much of the year demonizing. Leftists mocked their angst, with the popular X account @_iamblakeley asking, "Has anyone checked in on Laura Loomer?"
The rabidly Islamophobic conspiracy theorist and staunch Trump loyalist was, in fact, having a social media meltdown.
Referring to the Republican congresswoman from Georgia who made a surprise retirement announcement on Friday, journalist Aaron Rupar wrote on Bluesky that "Trump feuding with Marjorie Taylor Greene but being in love with Zohran Mamdani was not on my November 2025 bingo card."
Some social media users noted that Trump offered Mamdani a more ringing endorsement than even some prominent Democrats.
"Trump is being nicer to Mamdani than Democratic leadership," journalist Ken Klippenstein wrote on Bluesky.
Another Bluesky account posted, "Donald Trump endorsed Zohran Mamdani before Chuck Schumer," a reference to the Senate majority leader—who never endorsed his party's nominee to lead the city they both call home.
Corporate Democrats' disdain for leftist candidates and ideology was on full display Thursday as the House of Representatives voted 285-98 in favor of a resolution "denouncing the horrors of socialism" in "all its forms," presumably including the variety that has been a dominant political force across Western democracies since shortly after World War II.
Eighty-six Democrats joined their Republican colleagues in voting for the resolution. The vote took place as Mamdani was en route to the White House.
Rep. Eugene Vindman—who was a White House national security lawyer at the time of the 2019 call—said it “would shock people if they knew what was said.”
The widow of Jamal Khashoggi on Friday joined Democratic members of Congress in urging President Donald Trump to release the transcript of a phone conversation between the US leader and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman following the journalist's 2018 kidnapping and gruesome murder by Saudi operatives.
Speaking outside the US Capitol in Washington, DC flanked by Democratic members of Congress including Reps. Eugene Vindman of Virginia and Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Hanan Elatr Khashoggi said she is seeking the lawmakers' help "to get the contents of the conversation between President Trump and MBS to get the truth."
“Try as much as you can to save the democratic freedom of America," Khashoggi implored the audience at the gathering. "Do not be a copy of the Middle East dictator countries. We look to America as our role model of modern civilization. Please maintain it.”
Jamal Khashoggi's widow, Hanan Elatr Khashoggi: "I'm seeking the help of Congressmen Vindman and Jamie Raskin, to get the transcript of the conversation between President Trump and Crown Prince MBS to understand the truth."
[image or embed]
— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) November 21, 2025 at 8:44 AM
Vindman urged the declassification and release of what he called a "highly disturbing" 2019 call between Trump and MBS—who US intelligence agencies say ordered Khashoggi's murder—the contents of which the congressman claimed “would shock people if they knew what was said.”
At the time of the call, Vindman was serving as a lawyer on Trump's National Security Council, where his duties included reviewing presidential communications with foreign leaders.
"All week, I’ve urged the president to release this transcript," Vindman said during his remarks at Friday's press conference. "Yesterday, I sent him a letter with 37 of my colleagues demanding its release. We will continue pressing until the American people get the truth.”
"Given President Trump’s disturbing and counterfactual defense of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman this week, I felt compelled to speak up on behalf of the Khashoggi family and the country I serve," he added.
On Tuesday, Trump warmly welcomed the crown prince to the White House, calling him a "respected man," designating Saudi Arabia a major non-NATO ally, and announcing the planned sale of F-35 fighter jets to the kingdom.
Trump also threatened an ABC News reporter who attempted to ask MBS about his role in Khashoggi's murder, calling the victim "somebody that was extremely controversial" and whom "a lot of people didn’t like."
“Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen," Trump said as MBS smugly looked on, dubiously adding that the crown prince "knew nothing about it."
Responding to Trump's comments, Khashoggi's widow said during Friday's press conference that “there is no justification to kidnap [Khashoggi], torture him, to kill him, and to cut him to pieces."
"This is a terrorist act," she added.
Khashoggi—a Washington Post columnist and permanent US resident—vanished in October 2018 while visiting the Saudi consulate in Istanbul. Turkish officials said he was attacked, suffocated to death, and dismembered with a bone saw inside the consular compound. One Turkish investigator said Khashoggi was tortured in front the Saudi consul-general and dismembered while he was still alive.
Saudi officials initially denied that Khashoggi died in the consulate but later confirmed his death, claiming it resulted from a “fistfight” gone wrong. In 2019, a Saudi court sentenced five people to death and three others to prison terms in connection with Khashoggi’s murder. However, the death sentences were later commuted.
The Central Intelligence Agency concluded that MBS ordered Khashoggi's murder. Saudi officials refuted the CIA's findings. Trump also expressed skepticism at his own intelligence agency's conclusion, which came as the US was selling or seeking to sell billions of dollars worth of arms to Saudi Arabia despite its rampant war crimes in Yemen.
Hopes that former President Joe Biden would take a different approach to Saudi Arabia over war crimes and Khashoggi's murder were dashed as his administration continued selling arms to the kingdom and argued in federal court that MBS should be granted sovereign immunity in a civil case filed by the slain journalist's widow.
Trump has sought closer ties to Saudi Arabia during his second term as he courts up to $1 trillion in investments from the kingdom and works to broker diplomatic normalization between Riyadh and Israel.
The New York Times reported Monday that the Trump Organization—which is run by the president’s two eldest sons—is “in talks that could bring a Trump-branded property" to Saudi Arabia, raising concerns about possible corruption and conflicts of interest.
"We stand with Rep. Deluzio and every patriot holding the line," said one veteran group. "We reject violence. We reject intimidation. And we will never apologize for defending the oath."
Just a day after President Donald Trump suggested that six congressional Democrats should be hanged for reminding members of the US military and intelligence community of their duty not to obey illegal orders, one of those lawmakers was the target of multiple bomb threats.
A spokesperson for US Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.) said Friday afternoon that his "district offices in Carnegie and Beaver County were both the targets of bomb threats this afternoon. The congressman and congressional staff are safe, and thank law enforcement for swiftly responding. Political violence and threats like this are unacceptable."
On Tuesday, the former US Navy officer had joined Democratic Reps. Jason Crow (Colo.), Maggie Goodlander (NH), and Chrissy Houlahan (Pa.), along with Sens. Mark Kelly (Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (Mich.), for the 90-second video.
Trump—who notably incited the deadly January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol while trying to overturn his loss in the 2020 presidential contest—lashed out at the six veterans of the military and intelligence agencies on his Truth Social platform Thursday, accusing them of "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!" and reposting a call to "HANG THEM."
Deluzio and the others have doubled down on their message that, as he says in the video, "you must refuse illegal orders."
In a joint statement responding to Trump's remarks, the six Democrats reiterated their commitment to upholding the oaths they took "to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," urged every American to "unite and condemn the president's calls for our murder and political violence," and stressed that "we will continue to lead and will not be intimidated."
Deluzio also addressed Trump's comments on CNN, denouncing his "outrageous call for political violence."
Other lawmakers, veterans, and political observers have also condemned Trump's comments—and the grassroots vet group Common Defense pointed to them on social media Friday, after Deluzio's staff confirmed the bomb threats.
"First: Common Defense unequivocally condemns political violence in all shapes, forms, and from any party. Violence has no place in our democracy. We believe in the rule of law. But we cannot ignore the cause and effect here," the organization said.
"The response to quoting the Constitution was a call for execution," the group continued. "Now, Rep. Deluzio, an Iraq War veteran, is facing actual bomb threats. When leaders normalize violence against political opponents, this or worse is the inevitable result."
"We stand with Rep. Deluzio and every patriot holding the line," Common Defense added. "We reject violence. We reject intimidation. And we will never apologize for defending the oath."