Ranjani Srinivasan, an Indian-origin PhD pupil from the same school, made headlines shortly after the imprisonment of Columbia University undergraduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was later identified as a criminal supporter who used the department’s CBP Home application to self-deport. Self-deportation entails leaving the country on one’s own rather than being detained and subject to deportation by the government. A CBP game was updated by the Donald Trump administration to facilitate the registration, supply of information, and declare that someone has no legal right to stay in the US.
Attorney Nathan Yaffe for Srinivasan, Nathan Yaffe, claimed Kristi Noem’s publish was misleading and that it demonstrated that Srinivasan was being targeted. Ms. Srinivasan booked a trip out of the country in accordance with US laws, which gave her a 15-day deadline to leave after DHS improperly terminated her pupil status, according to Yaffe. Yaffe told CNN that the fact that DHS falsely claimed she” self-deported” via a CBP software only serves to underscore how biased the administration is against her.
Emigration officials visited Srinivasan without warrant after her immigration was unlawfully revoked.
The 37-year-old Harvard student has been living in the US since 2016 and this is her final year pursuing a PhD. The pro-Palestine protests on the school campus, which she and Mahmoud Khalil are associated with, are what makes her and Mahmoud Khalil, according to Srinivasan’s attorney, who claimed that this is a misunderstood association. She was wrongfully detained last year while she was returning from a protest. She was summonsed to judge and charged, but because she didn’t participate in the demonstration, those charges were dropped.
Her attorneys claimed that the school, in response to the administration’s demands, improperly revoked her student visa, and that she had no justification for it.
When ICE officials arrived at Srinivasan’s entrance the same day they picked up Mahmoud Khalil, she did never leave the door open. The officers threatened to return to her residence until they could touch her, according to Srinivasan’s attorneys, who claimed during their first visit that they did not have a warrant.
Although it was unclear whether the court summons were Srinivasan’s single cause for her pupil card being revoked, the DHS claimed she suppressed about it during the process of renewing her visa.
