A federal judge in Boston has decided to release Iranian-born engineer Mahdi Sadeghi on bail before his trial. The decision was based on the assessment that the tensions between Iran and the US may have reduced the risk of flight.
US District Judge Indira Talwani permitted Sadeghi’s release on a $500,000 bond with strict house arrest conditions. Sadeghi will return home and follow the proceedings from there as his trial approaches.
Charge Related to Export Restrictions
Sadeghi is accused of being part of a scheme to illegally obtain guidance technology used in Iranian military drones. According to federal prosecutors, the microelectronics obtained during this process reached a company supplying materials to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.
Authorities claim this technology was found in the Iranian-made Shahed UAV used in an attack on the US military base Tower 22 in Jordan in January 2024. The attack killed three Army Reserve soldiers and injured 47 others.
Court Previously Opposed Release
Talwani had denied Sadeghi’s pretrial release for months, citing concerns he might flee to Iran to avoid prosecution. However, in Thursday’s ruling, she stated that the political and security environment has changed.
The judge assessed that following the outbreak of war in February, the likelihood of Sadeghi and his family returning to Iran has become far less appealing and practical. She described the situation as "a different political world."
Talwani also noted that Sadeghi’s wife wants the family to remain in Natick, Massachusetts. It was pointed out that if Sadeghi fled, he would lose his residency in the US.
Defendants and Upcoming Trial
Sadeghi, a former employee of Analog Devices, denies the charges. He is scheduled to appear in court on June 22.
Another defendant in the case, Iranian businessman Mohammad Abedini, will not be tried alongside Sadeghi. Italian authorities released Abedini last year before extraditing him to the US, following Iran’s detention and subsequent release of an Italian journalist.
Increasing Pressure on Immigration and Foreign Policy
As the case proceeds, the Trump administration’s stance toward Iranian nationals is also hardening. It is reported that the administration has expanded deportation efforts targeting Iranian asylum seekers and green card holders in the US.
The US government is reportedly preparing to send Iranians and other migrants to the Central African Republic under a new third-country agreement. Among those included are two Iranian women at over 50% risk of torture or persecution if returned to Iran.
One of these women is a convert to Christianity, and the other is a pro-democracy activist. Ali Rahnama, interim legal director of the Iranian-American Legal Defense Fund, argued that this practice contradicts Washington’s rhetoric.
Rahnama stated that while the US promises freedom and support to the Iranian people, it is putting refugees fleeing the same regime at renewed risk. The administration is also reportedly using its immigration powers against individuals it views as inconsistent with its foreign policy interests.
Prominent Iranian-Origin Figures Also Under Scrutiny
The report noted that the State Department is using federal immigration law to initiate deportation processes against foreign nationals seen as contrary to US foreign policy. This authority has increased scrutiny of prominent figures in the Iranian-American diaspora.
An investigation is reportedly underway into Trita Parsi, founding partner of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. Parsi, a green card holder, has long advocated diplomatic engagement with Tehran.
Federal agents recently revoked green cards of relatives of Masoumeh Ebtekar, a leading figure in the 1979 US embassy takeover, and detained the nephew and grandnephew of Qassem Soleimani.
These developments indicate that while the war continues abroad, security, immigration, and foreign policy lines are becoming more tightly intertwined within the US. The Sadeghi ruling reveals how courts are reflecting the new political landscape created by the war in their bail decisions.
