Judge Tosses Lawsuit From Disinformation Activist Challenging Potential Deportation

A federal judge on Sept. 8 threw out a lawsuit from a British man living in the United States who campaigns against what he calls disinformation and was challenging his potential deportation.

U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska in New York tossed the litigation from Imran Ahmed, founder of the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a group that created a list labeling people, including now-Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as disinformation spreaders who should be banned from social media websites.

Under judicial precedent and federal law, Preska said, she is not able to review Ahmed’s claims.

“Ultimately, while Mr. Ahmed may very well have valid causes of action, his claims are premature, and Congress has determined that this Court may not review them,” she said. “Rather, judicial review of his claims will be available upon his receipt of a final removal order and filing of a petition for review (‘PFR’) with the appropriate Court of Appeals.”

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York declined to comment. A lawyer representing Ahmed did not return an inquiry.

Federal law says that all challenges dealing with actions to remove immigrants from the United States must be filed with an appeals court.

The government had highlighted that law, and rulings on the matter by various appeals courts, in briefs to the judge.

Ahmed’s lawyers had argued that the case could be reviewed by the district court because immigration proceedings had not yet commenced, and no order of removal had been issued.

Preska had previously issued a temporary restraining order barring officials from arresting or detaining Ahmed while the case advanced. She kept the order in place for five business days to give Ahmed time to appeal.

Ahmed, a legal permanent resident who resides in the United States, sued the U.S. government in 2025 after it moved to deport him. He said the move amounted to punitive action for speech protected by the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment.

“Simply put, immigration enforcement—here, immigration detention and threatened deportation—may not be used as a tool to punish noncitizen speakers who express views disfavored by the current administration,” the lawsuit stated.

Officials had determined that Ahmed helped the Biden administration “weaponiz[e] the national security bureaucracy to censor U.S. citizens and pressure U.S. companies into censoring,” and that removing him from the country would help protect Americans’ freedom of expression, according to public statements and court filings.

“This determination reflects this Department’s efforts to reject encroachments upon American sovereignty, especially when such encroachments undermine the exercise of our fundamental right to free speech,” U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio wrote in determining Ahmed could be deported.