A federal judge on Thursday ordered the release from immigration custody of the family of a man charged in a fatal 2025 firebomb attack in Boulder, Colorado, against demonstrators supporting Israeli hostages in Gaza.
U.S. District Judge Fred Biery in San Antonio said Hayam El Gamal and her five children can be released from a family immigration detention center in Dilley, Texas, as long as El Gamal and her oldest child, who is 18, wear electronic monitoring. Biery denied the government’s request to stay his ruling so it could appeal.
El Gamal was born in Saudi Arabia and is an Egyptian national. She and her family have been in immigration detention since June after her husband, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, was accused of throwing two Molotov cocktails at people demonstrating for awareness of Israeli hostages in Gaza. An 82-year-old Holocaust survivor who was injured in the attack later died. El Gamal has claims she was shocked by the attack.
Soliman is an Egyptian national who federal authorities say was living in the U.S. illegally. He is being prosecuted in both state and federal court for the attack, which prosecutors say injured a total of 13 people. Investigators say he planned the attack for a year and was driven by a desire “to kill all Zionist people.” He has pleaded not guilty to state charges, including a murder charge, and federal hate crimes charges.
After the attack, the Trump administration claimed the family was being rushed out of the country. The White House said in social media posts that they “COULD BE DEPORTED AS EARLY AS TONIGHT” and that six one-way tickets had been purchased for them, with their “final boarding call coming soon.”
Biery decided to release the family even though an immigration appeals court had dismissed their case to stay and issued a deportation order for them. That came after a federal magistrate judge recommended on Monday that they should be released.
Lawyers for the family claim the deportation order was directed by the “political leadership” in Washington, which the government’s lawyer, Anne Marie Cordova, denied. People who have final deportation orders are normally subject to mandatory detention.
Biery had barred the family from being deported until he could hold Thursday’s hearing. One of the family’s lawyers, Chris Godshall-Bennett, told Biery they will also ask the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans to stop the family from being deported while they seek asylum and permission to remain in the United States.
Another federal judge blocked their immediate removal after the attack. Since then, the family has tried several times to be released on bond and return to Colorado while their asylum application is considered.
The magistrate judge recommended this week that they be released after their attorneys argued they have not been treated fairly in immigration proceedings.
(AP)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
3 Responses
There doesn’t seem to be any evidence that the wife or the children have done anything wrong. On the other hand, they’re here illegally; while they have the right to a court hearing on any claims they may make for why they should be allowed to stay, until that time they should remain in custody like any other illegal alien who is due for deportation.
Under American law (in fact, it was in the Constitution adopted in 1789), it is not a crime to be related to a criminal. It is true, not all countries are so liberal (e.g. Germany during World War II routinely arrested all family members of opponents of the regime). The Trump administration should document they are deportable as illegal aliens or for fraud in their visa/citizenship application, or present sufficient evidence to indict them for the terrorist attack, and stop thinking it is “cool” to rely on a Nazi legal theory (albeit derived from English law, and part of American law prior to the Revolution).
akuperma, the administration has already documented that they’re deportable as illegal aliens. There’s already a final deportation order against them; now they have the right to a court hearing on any arguments they may be able to make against that order, but in the meantime they should be in custody.