(WASHINGTON) — A federal judge has found federal officials unconstitutionally violated the free speech rights of pro-Palestinian protesters in its effort to deport international students and scholars expressing pro-Palestinian views, including Columbia University’s Mahmoud Khalil and Tuft’s University’s Rumeysa Ozturk.
“This Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, together with the subordinate officials and, agents of each of them, deliberately and with purposeful aforethought, did so concert their actions and those of their two departments intentionally to chill the rights to freedom of speech and peacefully to assemble of the non-citizen plaintiff members of the plaintiff associations,” U.S. District Court Judge William Young wrote in a decision Tuesday.
The decision came as part of a lawsuit filed by the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, which represents hundreds of professors and students across the country.
A bench trial was held in the case in July. In the course of the trial, it was revealed the government looked into more than 5,000 people named on the doxxing website Canary mission in its effort to revoke the visas of student protesters.
Young, a Ronald Reagan appointee, said Rubio and Noem used the attempted deportation of some pro-Palestinian protesters to create a chilling effect that would discourage others from participating in protests.
“It was never the Secretaries’ immediate intention to deport all pro-Palestinian non-citizens for that obvious First Amendment violation, that could have raised a major outcry,” Young wrote in the order. “Rather, the intent of the Secretaries was more invidious — to target a few for speaking out and then use the full rigor of the Immigration and Nationality Act (in ways it had never been used before) to have them publicly deported with the goal of tamping down pro-Palestinian student protests and terrorizing similarly situated non-citizen (and other) pro-Palestinians into silence because their views were unwelcome.”
Young said President Donald Trump’s support of this effort violates his oath to “preserve, protect and defend the constitution,” though he is immune from any consequences for this conduct per the U.S. Supreme Court.
“The Secretaries have succeeded, apparently well beyond their immediate intentions. One may speculate that they acted under instructions from the White House, but speculation is not evidence and this Court does not so find,” Young wrote.
“What is clear, however, is that the President may not have authorized this operation (or even known about it), but once it was in play the President wholeheartedly supported it, making many individual case specific comments (some quite cruel) that demonstrate he has been fully briefed,” Young said.
While Young wrote that he found clear and convincing evidence of constitutional violations, he does not expect a correction from authorities or public outcry.
“The President in recent months has strikingly unapologetically increased his attack on First Amendment values, balked here and there by District Court orders,” Young said.
Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.
