Judge Blocks Trump Administration's Deportation of Pro-Palestinian Activists
Translated from English and summarized by DistantNews. Read the original for the full story.
At a glance
- A federal judge ruled that US laws used by the Trump administration to deport noncitizen students for pro-Palestinian advocacy are unconstitutional.
- The judge criticized the State Department and DHS for using immigration law provisions to target students expressing views critical of Israel.
- The ruling supports the argument that free speech, including criticism of the government, is essential to democracy and should not be suppressed.
A federal judge has delivered a significant blow to the Trump administration's efforts to deport noncitizen college students based on their pro-Palestinian advocacy. US District Judge Noel Wise in San Jose, California, ruled on Friday that the laws used to cancel visas and initiate deportation proceedings were unconstitutional.
In a strongly worded decision, Judge Wise chastised the US State Department and the Department of Homeland Security. She stated that these agencies had improperly deployed federal immigration law provisions to target individuals for deportation simply for expressing views they wished to suppress. The judge, appointed by President Joe Biden, emphasized that free speech, including the right to criticize the government and its leaders, is a hallmark of American democracy.
That strength is diminished when members of our society โ citizens and noncitizens alike โ must self-censor and 'behave' or suffer the governmentโs retaliation.
"That strength is diminished when members of our society โ citizens and noncitizens alike โ must self-censor and 'behave' or suffer the governmentโs retaliation," Wise wrote. Her ruling specifically addressed how the Trump administration, starting in March 2025, began revoking visas and detaining non-citizens involved in pro-Palestinian activism on campuses. This policy was exemplified by the arrest of Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who is separately fighting deportation.
the government is singling out that speech for disfavored treatment based on its viewpoint or content.
The case gained prominence following a lawsuit filed by Stanford University's student newspaper, The Stanford Daily. The newspaper alleged that some of its writers, who held student visas, had refrained from covering pro-Palestinian protests and related topics due to the administration's policies. Their lawyers argued that the specific provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act used by the administration violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution by targeting constitutionally protected speech.
Judge Wise agreed, stating that when a noncitizen's speech is the basis for visa revocation and deportation, "the government is singling out that speech for disfavored treatment based on its viewpoint or content." Conor Fitzpatrick of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, representing the student newspaper, hailed the ruling, asserting that "free speech isnโt a privilege, but the inalienable right of every man, woman, and child." This decision echoes a similar ruling last year by Boston-based US District Judge William Young.
free speech isnโt a privilege, but the inalienable right of every man, woman, and child.
Originally published by Asharq Al-Awsat in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized automatically by DistantNews, with a note on how the source frames the story. Not individually reviewed before publishing. How this works.