Judge blocks deportation of Boulder attack suspect's family amid due process concerns
- Federal immigration officials had planned to remove Hayem El Gamal and her children following the arrest of Mohamed Soliman on June 1, 2025, for a firebombing attack.
- Judge Gallagher's order emphasized the urgent need for due process to prevent potential irreparable harm to the family.
- The case highlights ongoing debates regarding immigration laws and how they interact with criminal proceedings in the U.S.
On June 4, 2025, a U.S. District Judge in Colorado issued a temporary restraining order against the deportation of Hayem El Gamal and her five children, the family of Mohamed Sabry Soliman, who was charged with a hate crime and multiple counts of attempted murder following a firebombing attack in Boulder. This judicial intervention came in light of urgent concerns regarding the family's due process rights and the potential irreparable harm they could face if deported without a court hearing. The judge emphasized the necessity of preserving the court's jurisdiction over the case amidst ongoing investigations into Soliman’s actions and possible legal proceedings against his family. On June 1, 2025, Soliman, who is alleged to have attacked a pro-Israeli demonstration with Molotov cocktails, was arrested, prompting U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to detain his family just days later. They had been living unlawfully in the U.S. since overstaying their visas, a situation that has now spurred federal authorities to closely examine their immigration status and any possible knowledge they may have had about Soliman's criminal plans. The ruling halted immediate deportation proceedings, which were set to expedite, and highlighted a conflict within the U.S. immigration system, where policy can lead to the punishment of innocent parties connected to alleged criminals. The judge scheduled a hearing for June 13, allowing for further legal scrutiny regarding the family's immigration status and asylum claims, amidst widespread public and political discourse surrounding both the attack and immigration enforcement policies. The incident sparked a significant political response, drawing attention to the ongoing debate over immigration laws and procedures in the U.S., especially regarding the treatment of families related to criminal defendants. This ruling reinforces the complexities of the current U.S. immigration system as it pertains to individuals and families connected to criminal defendants, as concerns over fair treatment, due process, and potential repercussions remain at the forefront of this unfolding drama.