Um, so before we go into tying all these different threads together, what is the implication of that move as far as the warrants against Israelis in the ICC or this never-ending case in the ICJ, which, uh, it's gonna go at least through 2029, if not, not farther?

I mean, the implication is we just live in an absolute bizarro world.

It's sometimes you just, uh, you can't make this stuff up.

But look, uh, even a UN secretary general report, it's not a conviction, it's not a judgment, it doesn't prove any responsibility, it doesn't establish anything, um, but it's dangerous.

It's dangerous because it becomes narrative infrastructure, right? And the way it works in all of these things is, you know, international legal bodies, NGOs, journalists, activists, they all cite each other in this incestuous circle.

So a UN report gets cited by an NGO, NGO gets cited by a newspaper, a newspaper gets cited by a litigant, litigant gets cited by a politician, and that looks like independent corroboration.

It's actually the same claim being recycled through five different institutions.

Um, but, uh, just give us a minute or two of background on that and try to connect it to some of the issues we've been talking about today.

So Marc, because you're the one with the most definitive view on the fact that he should be deported, give us the legal grounds to deport him and maybe talk a little bit about the lawsuit that you just filed in the Southern District of New York.

And I wanna agree with, um, both Eugene and Jed that the First Amendment is incredibly important, but it does not shield material support for terrorism, and that, I believe, is the central issue at hand in the case of Mahmoud Khalil and his co-conspirators.

He's not being held for his speech, which would be protected I think, albeit to a slightly lesser degree for non-citizens, he's being held for his actions.

And if you go through the list of those actions, which I'm happy to do, just this afternoon, we're filming this on a Monday, just this afternoon we filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York actually naming him as one of the defendants in an ATA case.

So Khalil leads the Columbia University Apartheid Divestment, CUAD group, which is their primary pro-Hamas group.

It's now fronting for the Suspended Students for Justice in Palestine.

SJP and its affiliates have already been credibly accused in federal court of providing material support to Hamas in a case in the Eastern District in Virginia.

What kind of substantial assistance, in the view of the case, did Khalil provide? And I would love for you to expand on what "in coordination with" means here.