Judge strikes down Trump-era visa policy targeting pro-Palestinian students

A federal judge has struck down a visa policy enacted under the Trump administration that targeted noncitizen college students for their pro-Palestinian advocacy and criticism of Israel. U.S. District Judge Noel Wise in San Jose, California, issued a strong ruling on Friday, chastising the U.S. State Department and Department of Homeland Security for their use of federal immigration law to revoke visas and initiate deportation proceedings against students whose views they sought to suppress.

Judge Wise, an appointee of President Joe Biden, emphasized the fundamental role of free speech in American democracy. "In the United States, free speech, including the freedom to criticize the government and its leaders, was evidence of the strength of the country's democracy," she stated. The judge added that this strength is undermined when individuals, both citizens and non-citizens, feel compelled to self-censor to avoid government retaliation.

“

That strength is diminished when members of our society – citizens and noncitizens alike – must self-censor and 'behave' or suffer the government’s retaliation.

The ruling specifically addressed how the Trump administration, beginning in March 2025, revoked visas and detained non-citizens for engaging in pro-Palestinian advocacy on college campuses. This policy was notably applied to Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who is currently fighting deportation. These actions formed the basis of a lawsuit filed by The Stanford Daily, the student newspaper, which alleged that some of its writers on student visas had curtailed their coverage of pro-Palestinian protests and related topics due to the administration's policies.

Lawyers for The Stanford Daily argued that two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, relied upon by the administration, violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. These provisions allowed the Secretary of State to deem noncitizens deportable if their actions were perceived to "compromise a compelling foreign policy interest" and permitted visa revocation at his discretion. Judge Wise agreed, finding that when speech is the basis for visa revocation and deportation, the government is unfairly targeting that speech based on its viewpoint or content.

“

the government is singling out that speech for disfavored treatment based on its viewpoint or content.