NEW DELHI: Tens of thousands of protesting Indian farmers have called for a national strike on Monday, the second in a week, to press for the quashing of three new laws on agricultural reform that they say will drive down crop prices and devastate their earnings.
The farmers are camping along at least five major highways on the outskirts of New Delhi and have said they won’t leave until the government rolls back what they call the “black laws.” They have blockaded highways leading to the capital for three weeks, and several rounds of talks with the Indian government have failed to produce any breakthroughs.
Farmer leaders have also planned a token hunger strike on Monday. Heavy contingents of police in riot gear patrolled the areas where the farmers have been camping in New Delhi’s outskirts.
Protest leaders have rejected the government’s offer to amend some contentious provisions of the new farm laws, which deregulate crop pricing, and have stuck to their demand for total repeal.
Farmer leaders have threatened to intensify their agitation and threatened to block trains in the coming days if the government doesn’t abolish the laws.
The farmers filed a petition with the Supreme Court on Friday seeking the quashing of the laws, which were passed in September. The petition was filed by the Bharatiya Kisan Union, or Indian Farmers’ Union, and its leader, Bhanu Pratap Singh, who argued that the laws were arbitrary because the government enacted them without proper consultations with stakeholders.
Five round of talks between the government and farmers since November have failed to halt the blockade, with the protesters continuing to insist that the laws be repealed.
Agriculture Minister Narendra Singh Tomar said Thursday that the government was willing to amend the laws to allay the farmers’ concerns, but that they should give up their insistence on scrapping them.
The farmers fear the government will stop buying grain at minimum guaranteed prices and corporations will then push prices down. The government says it is willing to pledge that guaranteed prices will continue.
With nearly 60 percent of the Indian population depending on agriculture for their livelihoods, the growing farmer rebellion has rattled Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration and its allies.
Modi’s government insists the reforms will benefit farmers. It says they will allow farmers to market their produce and boost production through private investment.
Farmers have been protesting the laws for nearly two months in Punjab and Haryana states. The situation escalated three weeks ago when tens of thousands marched to New Delhi, where they clashed with police.
Protesting Indian farmers call for second strike in a week
https://arab.news/pxma2
Protesting Indian farmers call for second strike in a week
- Camped out farmers to stay until the government rolls back what they call the ‘black laws’
- Farmer leaders have threatened to intensify their agitation and threatened to block trains in the coming days
Court ruling jeopardizes freedom for pro-Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil
- The panel ruled a federal judge in New Jersey didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the matter at this time
- The law bars Khalil “from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition,” the panel added
WASHINGTON: A federal appeals panel on Thursday reversed a lower court decision that released former Columbia University graduate student Mahmoud Khalil from an immigration jail, bringing the government one step closer to detaining and ultimately deporting the Palestinian activist.
The three-judge panel of the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals didn’t decide the key issue in Khalil’s case: whether the Trump administration’s effort to throw Khalil out of the US over his campus activism and criticism of Israel is unconstitutional.
But in its 2-1 decision, the panel ruled a federal judge in New Jersey didn’t have jurisdiction to decide the matter at this time. Federal law requires the case to fully move through the immigration courts first, before Khalil can challenge the decision, they wrote.
“That scheme ensures that petitioners get just one bite at the apple — not zero or two,” the panel wrote. “But it also means that some petitioners, like Khalil, will have to wait to seek relief for allegedly unlawful government conduct.”
The law bars Khalil “from attacking his detention and removal in a habeas petition,” the panel added.
Ruling won’t result in immediate detention
It was not clear whether the government would seek to detain Khalil, a legal permanent resident, again while his legal challenges continue.
Thursday’s decision marked a major win for the Trump administration’s sweeping campaign to detain and deport noncitizens who joined protests against Israel.
In a statement distributed by the American Civil Liberties Union, Khalil said the appeals ruling was “deeply disappointing, but it does not break our resolve.”
He added: “The door may have been opened for potential re-detainment down the line, but it has not closed our commitment to Palestine and to justice and accountability. I will continue to fight, through every legal avenue and with every ounce of determination, until my rights, and the rights of others like me, are fully protected.”
Baher Azmy, one of Khalil’s lawyers, said the ruling was “contrary to rulings of other federal courts.” He noted the panel’s finding concerned a “hypertechnical jurisdictional matter,” rather than the legality of the Trump administration’s policy.
“Our legal options are by no means concluded, and we will fight with every available avenue,” he added, saying Khalil would remain free pending the full resolution of all appeals, which could take months or longer.
The ACLU said the Trump administration cannot lawfully re-detain Khalil until the order takes formal effect, which won’t happen while he can still immediately appeal.
Khalil has multiple options to appeal
Khalil’s lawyers can request the active judges on the 3rd Circuit hear an appeal, or they can go to the US Supreme Court.
An outspoken leader of the pro-Palestinian movement at Columbia, Khalil was arrested on March 8, 2025. He then spent three months detained in a Louisiana immigration jail, missing the birth of his firstborn.
Federal officials have accused Khalil of leading activities “aligned to Hamas,” though they have not presented evidence to support the claim and have not accused him of criminal conduct. They have also accused Khalil, 30, of failing to disclose information on his green card application.
The government has justified the arrest under a seldom-used statute that allows for the expulsion of noncitizens whose beliefs are deemed to pose a threat to US foreign policy interests.
In June, a federal judge in New Jersey ruled that justification would likely be declared unconstitutional and ordered Khalil released.
President Donald Trump’s administration appealed that ruling, arguing the deportation decision should fall to an immigration judge, rather than a federal court.
Khalil has dismissed the allegations as “baseless and ridiculous,” framing his arrest and detention as a “direct consequence of exercising my right to free speech as I advocated for a free Palestine and an end to the genocide in Gaza.”
Dissenting judge says Khalil has right to fight detention
Judge Arianna Freeman dissented Thursday, writing that her colleagues were holding Khalil to the wrong legal standard. Khalil, she wrote, is raising “now-or-never claims” that can be handled at the district court level. He does not have a final order of removal, which would permit a challenge in an appellate court, she wrote.
Both judges who ruled against Khalil, Thomas Hardiman and Stephanos Bibas, were Republican appointees. President George W. Bush appointed Hardiman to the 3rd Circuit, while Trump appointed Bibas. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, appointed Freeman.
The majority opinion noted Freeman worried the ruling would leave Khalil with no remedy for unconstitutional immigration detention, even if he later can appeal.
“But our legal system routinely forces petitioners — even those with meritorious claims — to wait to raise their arguments, the judges wrote. “To be sure, the immigration judge’s order of removal is not yet final; the Board has not affirmed her ruling and has held the parties’ briefing deadlines in abeyance pending this opinion. But if the Board ultimately affirms, Khalil can get meaningful review.”
The decision comes as an appeals board in the immigration court system weighs a previous order that found Khalil could be deported. His attorneys have argued that the federal order should take precedence.
That judge has suggested Khalil could be deported to Algeria, where he maintains citizenship through a distant relative, or Syria, where he was born in a refugee camp to a Palestinian family.
His attorneys have said he faces mortal danger if forced to return to either country.










