According to filings in the district court, he was charged with the first theory. Perhaps the second theory is a fallback, but my impression is they want to charge him based solely upon the Secretary of State's decision and fight any effort to review that decision or any materials relied upon the Secretary in forming it. OTOH, Khalil's lawyers appear to be fighting deportation on Constitutional principles, the first and fifth amendments, which don't require looking at the facts concerning Khalil.
All that said, it doesn't seem to me that there will be much discovery in this case, certainly not pertaining to who is paying his lawyers (some of whom identify as pro bono).
The commenter archive features may be temporarily disabled at times.
According to filings in the district court, he was charged with the first theory. Perhaps the second theory is a fallback, but my impression is they want to charge him based solely upon the Secretary of State's decision and fight any effort to review that decision or any materials relied upon the Secretary in forming it. OTOH, Khalil's lawyers appear to be fighting deportation on Constitutional principles, the first and fifth amendments, which don't require looking at the facts concerning Khalil.
All that said, it doesn't seem to me that there will be much discovery in this case, certainly not pertaining to who is paying his lawyers (some of whom identify as pro bono).