BIA fast-tracked Mahmoud Khalil's deportation case in 9-day 'unprecedented' turnaround

On May 11, 2026, The New York Times reported that internal Department of Justice case-tracking documents it had obtained showed the Board of Immigration Appeals — the appellate tribunal that hears immigration appeals from within the Department of Justice — moved Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil's deportation case along an unusually fast procedural track. According to the documents, Khalil's case was flagged as high-priority before the board officially received the file; an internal staff note instructed BIA personnel to handle the case as if Khalil were still in detention — a status that accelerates adjudication — even though he had already been released; the board's chair was personally involved in the case from its early stages; and the BIA's April 9, 2026 ruling that Khalil could be deported came just nine days after the paperwork was submitted, in a category of case the board often takes years to decide. At least three judges recused themselves from the proceedings.

Homero López, a former BIA member appointed under President Biden and later fired under President Trump, told the Times the timeline was "unprecedented" and "an insane turnaround, particularly for such a high-profile case on a novel legal issue." Responding to the reporting on social media, Khalil characterized the procedure as "corrupt and unprecedented" and said the administration had "put me through a sham immigration process while guaranteeing the outcome in advance." Khalil's legal team — the Center for Constitutional Rights, ACLU, and NYCLU — filed a motion the same day asking the BIA to reopen Khalil's case and terminate proceedings, citing the documented procedural irregularities as evidence the original decision was tainted.

The BIA is statutorily required to make independent decisions, but sits administratively inside the Department of Justice and is staffed by attorneys whose appointments and removals run through the Attorney General's office. The documents disclosed by the Times place the Khalil ruling squarely inside that institutional friction: a high- profile case adjudicated against a politically prominent activist target, with the appellate process compressed to a fraction of its ordinary timeline and with the administration's preferred outcome locked in before independent review could meaningfully occur.