Immigration Judge Authorized Deportation of Salah Sarsour

A federal judge ruled that Salah Sarsour can be deported from the U.S. due to foreign policy concerns.

Updated on Sept. 30, 2026 in Immigration

Immigration Judge Authorized Deportation of Salah Sarsour

Live Poll

Should the government have broad power to deport long-term residents based on foreign policy concerns?

An immigration judge has ruled that the U.S. government may proceed with the deportation of Salah Sarsour, the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee. The court determined that Sarsour poses a foreign policy threat, though it cleared him of allegations that he lied on his green card application.

Why it matters

The government contends that Sarsour is a national security threat based on his past criminal convictions in Israel. His attorneys plan to challenge the deportation order by arguing that he faces a risk of torture if removed to Israel.

The ruling followed a June 2025 memo from Secretary of State Marco Rubio regarding the case. Sarsour has lived in the United States for over 30 years since arriving in 1993.

The players

Salah Sarsour

He serves as the president of the Islamic Society of Milwaukee and has resided in the United States since 1993.

Marco Rubio

He serves as the Secretary of State and issued a memorandum regarding the deportation of Salah Sarsour in June 2025.

The details

The judge rejected claims that Sarsour falsified his green card application, though the ruling maintains that his decades-old terrorism-related convictions in Israel justify his removal. Sarsour, who was previously detained by ICE in March 2026 before being released by a federal judge in June 2026, intends to contest the court's decision.

Sarsour was imprisoned in Israel in 1988.
Sarsour arrived in the United States in 1993.
Sarsour was convicted of weapons charges in Israel in 1995.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a deportation memo in June 2025.
The immigration judge issued the deportation ruling on September 30, 2026.

Political Context

Critics of the ruling argue that the deportation order relies on outdated history and ignores the absence of any criminal record in the United States. Supporters of the government's position maintain that the national security risk presented by the prior convictions outweighs his long-term residency.

The case highlights how past international criminal records can trigger U.S. deportation proceedings even for long-term residents. This ruling serves as a reminder to the local community of the ongoing intersection between foreign policy directives and federal immigration enforcement.

The takeaway

This case illustrates the complex legal process involved when the government asserts that an individual is a national security risk. The upcoming legal appeal will test the threshold for how international criminal history affects the immigration status of long-term U.S. residents.