British Journalist Detained at U.S. Airport After Criticizing Israel

(SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA) British journalist and political commentator Sami Hamdi was detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at San Francisco International Airport on October 26, 2025, after his visa was revoked while he was on a speaking tour in the United States 🇺🇸. Hamdi, who had recently spoken at an event organized by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Sacramento, is now facing deportation, according to advocates and civil rights groups monitoring the case.

As of October 28, 2025, he remains in ICE custody pending removal proceedings. The detention has drawn international scrutiny and sparked debate about free speech and immigration policy.

Detention, visa revocation, and immediate responses

Hamdi is known for his public criticism of the Israeli government, particularly its actions in Gaza. Supporters say the detention appears linked to those views. CAIR called the arrest a “blatant affront to free speech” and said it is assisting in efforts to secure his release.

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) — which oversees ICE — has cited national security concerns and alleged that Hamdi supports terrorism. Advocates and civil society groups say those claims are unsubstantiated and have strongly disputed them.

Key procedural context:
– A visa can be revoked whether a foreign national is outside or inside the U.S.
– Revocation can lead to detention if the person seeks entry or is at a port of entry.
– In Hamdi’s case, the action occurred at San Francisco International Airport while his speaking tour continued after the CAIR event.

CAIR and allied organizations have questioned the timing and whether protected political speech played a role. DHS has publicly referenced security concerns but has not provided detailed public evidence supporting the allegations.

Press freedom advocates have responded strongly:
– The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) called the detention a misuse of anti-terror legislation and a threat to freedom of expression.
– CAIR condemned the detention as retaliation for Hamdi’s criticism of Israel and pledged continued advocacy.

For official background on ICE custody and removal processes, see the agency’s Enforcement and Removal Operations materials at: U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Free speech concerns and broader implications

Supporters argue this incident highlights a broader pattern in which outspoken critics of Israeli policy face visa consequences. Rights groups say this trend undermines free expression and sets a troubling precedent for:
– Journalists
– Academics
– Public speakers

DHS’s stated position centers on national security. Immigration authorities do have broad border powers, and visa status is a privilege that can be withdrawn. Critics warn, however, that using immigration powers against speech—especially by journalists—blurs the line between security and censorship.

Notable perspectives:
– The IFJ and CAIR argue the allegations against Hamdi lack evidence.
– They contend that detaining a journalist over controversial but lawful speech would harm press freedom norms.
– Civil rights and Muslim community advocates say the episode echoes past intersections of political speech and immigration control.

Practical consequences often cited:
– Rapid legal and public advocacy responses are common in such incidents because the stakes are immediate and severe: loss of access to the U.S., reputational damage, and family or career disruption.
– Journalists’ groups warn punitive appearance for political speech can deter reporters and commentators from traveling to the U.S. for conferences and events.
– The broader fear is a chilling effect on debate if speakers believe visas could be revoked after criticizing powerful actors or governments.

What comes next: legal process and stakes

As of October 28, 2025, Sami Hamdi remains in ICE custody and is pending deportation proceedings. Typical next steps in such cases include:
1. Custody review by ICE or immigration judges.
2. Opportunity for legal representation where available.
3. Potential administrative or judicial challenges to visa revocation.

Immediate community concerns include:
– Access to counsel and timely legal advice
– Access to medical care if needed
– Clear information about case status for family and supporters

CAIR has indicated it is working toward his release, and the IFJ has urged respect for press freedom and cautioned against using anti-terror tools to target political commentary. DHS maintains national security concerns justified the visa revocation, though advocates say those claims have not been publicly substantiated.

Stakeholder positions and policy questions

Stakeholders reflect a clear divide:

• IFJ: Calls the detention a threat to free expression and misuse of anti-terror measures.
• CAIR: Condemns the action as retaliatory and is actively seeking Hamdi’s release.
• DHS: Cites national security as the basis for revocation; critics say DHS has not publicly provided supporting evidence.

Policy and practical takeaways:
– Immigration law grants wide discretion at the border; agencies can act quickly on claimed security grounds.
– Civil society groups argue immigration tools should not be used to punish dissenting viewpoints that fall within lawful speech.
– Organizers and event hosts may need greater caution and contingency planning when inviting speakers on politically sensitive topics.

The balance between security and freedom of expression remains central to this dispute. How the government explains the national security rationale — and whether evidence is provided — will shape public understanding of the case.

Human impact and wider significance

Hamdi’s supporters emphasize the immediate human stakes. What began as a speaking tour that included a CAIR event in Sacramento has become a high-stress legal fight with deportation possible unless authorities reverse course or a legal challenge succeeds.

Potential consequences and signals:
– The outcome will send a message to journalists abroad and advocacy groups about how the U.S. applies immigration power in cases involving political speech.
– It may influence how government agencies, event organizers, and foreign commentators approach travel to and participation in U.S. public forums.

For now, the record reflects sharp disagreement: DHS stands by its security claims; CAIR, the IFJ, and other advocates say there is no evidence tying Sami Hamdi to violence or terrorism and argue the action undermines core principles of free speech and press freedom.