A recap of the trial over the Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus protesters
The lawsuit, filed by several university associations, is one of the first against President Trump and members of his administration to go to trial. Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge William Young to rule that the policy violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, a law that governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations.
The government argues that no such policy exists and that it is enforcing immigration laws legally to protect national security.
One of the key witnesses was Peter Hatch, who works for the Homeland Security Investigations unit of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Over two days of testimony, Hatch told the court a 'Tiger Team' was formed in March — after two executive orders that addressed terrorism and combating antisemitism — to investigate people who took part in the protests.
Hatch said the team received as many as 5,000 names of protesters and wrote reports on about 200 who had potentially violated U.S. law. The reports, several of which were shown in court Thursday, included biographical information, criminal history, travel history and affiliations with pro-Palestinian groups as well as press clips and social media posts on their activism or allegations of their affiliation with Hamas or other anti-Israel groups.
Until this year, Hatch said, he could not recall a student protester being referred for a visa revocation.
'It was anything that may relate to national security or public safety issues, things like: Were any of the protesters violent or inciting violence? I think that's a clear, obvious one,' Hatch testified. 'Were any of them supporting terrorist organizations? Were any of them involved in obstruction or unlawful activity in the protests?'
Among the report subjects were Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was released last month after 104 days in federal immigration detention. Khalil has become a symbol of Trump's clampdown on the protests.
Another was Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was released in May from a Louisiana facility. She spent six weeks in detention after she was arrested while walking on the street of a Boston suburb. She says she was illegally detained following an op-ed she cowrote last year criticizing the school's response to the war in Gaza.
Hatch also acknowledged that most of the names came from Canary Mission, a group that says it documents people who 'promote hatred of the U.S.A., Israel and Jews on North American college campuses.' The right-wing Jewish group Betar was another source, he said.
Hatch said most of the leads were dropped when investigators could not find ties to protests and the investigations were not inspired by a new policy but rather a procedure in place at least since he took the job in 2019.
Weeks before Khalil's arrest, a spokesperson for Betar told the Associated Press that the activist topped a list of foreign students and faculty from nine universities that it submitted to officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who made the decision to revoke Khalil's visa.
The Department of Homeland Security said at the time that it was not working with Betar and refused to answer questions about how it was treating reports from outside groups.
In March, speculation grew that administration officials were using Canary Mission to identify and target student protesters. That's when immigration agents arrested Ozturk.
Canary Mission has denied working with administration officials, while noting speculation that its reports led to that arrest and others.
While Canary Mission prides itself on outing anyone it labels as antisemitic, its leaders refuse to identify themselves and its operations are secretive. News reports and tax filings have linked the site to a nonprofit based in the central Israeli city of Beit Shemesh. But journalists who have visited the group's address, listed in documents filed with Israeli authorities, have found a locked and seemingly empty building.
In recent years, news organizations have reported that several wealthy Jewish Americans made cash contributions to support Canary Mission, disclosed in tax paperwork filed by their personal foundations. But most of the group's funding remains opaque, funneled through a New York-based fund that acts as a conduit for Israeli causes.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs pressed a State Department official Friday over whether protests were grounds for revoking a student's visa, repeatedly invoking several cables issued in response to Trump's executive orders as examples of policy guidance.
But Maureen Smith, a senior adviser in the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs, said protest alone wasn't a critical factor. She wasn't asked specifically about pro-Palestinian protests.
'It's a bit of a hypothetical question. We would need to look at all the facts of the case,' she said. 'If it were a visa holder who engages in violent activity, whether it's during a protest or not — if they were arrested for violent activity — that is something we would consider for possible visa revocation.'
Smith also said she didn't think a student taking part in a nonviolent protest would be a problem but said it would be seen in a 'negative light' if the protesters supported terrorism. She wasn't asked to define what qualified as terrorism nor did she provide examples of what that would include.
The trial opened with Megan Hyska, a green card holder from Canada who is a philosophy professor at Northwestern University, detailing how efforts to deport Khalil and Ozturk prompted her to scale back her activism, which had included supporting student encampments and protesting in support of Palestinians.
'It became apparent to me, after I became aware of a couple of high-profile detentions of political activists, that my engaging in public political dissent would potentially endanger my immigration status,' Hyska said.
Nadje Al-Ali, a green card holder from Germany and professor at Brown University, said that after the arrests of Khalil and Ozturk, she canceled a planned research trip and a fellowship to Iraq and Lebanon, fearing that 'stamps from those two countries would raise red flags' upon her return. She also declined to take part in anti-Trump protests and dropped plans to write an article that was to be a feminist critique of Hamas.
'I felt it was too risky,' Al-Ali said.
Casey writes for the Associated Press. AP writer Adam Geller in New York contributed to this report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
9 minutes ago
- CNN
In a deal with Trump, Europe gets an elusive agreement. But everyone's a little annoyed
Tariffs European Union Prescription drugsFacebookTweetLink Follow The United States and the European Union avoided the worst-case scenario: a damaging, all-out trade war between allies that threatened to raise prices on a large number of goods and slow two of the world's largest economies. The framework delivered a sense of relief for both sides – but few are cheering the arrangement itself. The agreement, which sets a 15% tariff on most European goods entering the United States, is higher than the 10% tariff Trump put in place on April 2 and significantly higher than the average of around 2% from before Trump's presidency. But it's significantly less than the enormous numbers Trump had been threatening if an agreement wasn't reached. A deal with the United States felt like an impossibility in late May. Frustrated by a lack of progress in negotiations with the 27-member European Union, Trump on May 24 told the world he was done talking to some of America's strongest allies. 'Our discussions with them are going nowhere!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I'm not looking for a deal,' he said later that day in the Oval Office. 'We've set the deal — it's at 50%.' The statement — and the shockingly high tariff threat — stunned European trade negotiators and rallied Europe's leaders into action. They quickly agreed to kick talks into high gear. Trump, who has taken a particular liking to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was swayed after she called him to say the EU would commit to moving 'swiftly and decisively.' Trump soon backed off his threat and said negotiations would continue. But a deal between the United States and the European Union, one of America's top trading partners, had remained elusive for months. The two sides squabbled over America's insistence on high tariffs for steel and aluminum, looming tariffs on pharmaceuticals and the tariff floor for virtually all goods that the Trump administration appears set to raise to 15%. Negotiators were unable to come up with a resolution before the initial July 9 deadline — one of the reasons the Trump administration postponed the effective day for its 'reciprocal' tariffs to August 1. With just days to go before the extended deadline, while Trump was visiting Scotland, he met with van der Leyen and finalized a framework for an agreement — one that was thin on details, heavy on caveats, but was nevertheless a hard-sought relief for both sides. With the agreement in place, two of the world's largest economies avoided a potential economically crippling trade war. The United States held a 50% tariff threat over Europe's head, and Europe threatened America with strategic retaliatory tariffs that threatened to damage key US industries. Both sides appeared to embrace the fact that a deal was in place more than they celebrated it. 'We made it,' Trump said while announcing the deal with von der Leyen. 'It's going to work out really well.' 'I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find,' von der Leyen said. 'Rebalance but enable trade on both sides. Which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic and that was important for us.' Markets cheered, somewhat: Dow futures rose 150 points, or 0.3%, poised to open near record territory. S&P 500 futures gained 0.3% and Nasdaq futures were 0.4% higher. The United States and Europe 'seem to have avoided a self-destructive trade war for now in the biggest and deepest commercial and investment relationship the global economy knows,' said Jörn Fleck, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Europe Center. Nevertheless, the details remain murky. Europe will increase its investment in the United States by $600 billion and commit to buying $750 billion worth of US energy products. It eliminates tariffs on a variety of items, including aircraft and plane parts, semiconductors, generic drugs and some chemicals and agricultural products. Industries in the zero-tariff arrangement cheered. 'The zero-for-zero tariff regime will grow jobs, strengthen our economic security and provide a framework for U.S. leadership in manufacturing and safety,' Airlines for America said in a statement. But the 15% baseline tariff applies to most goods, so the EU member states – and American importers — will have to come to terms with the fact that higher tariffs will raise prices for European goods in America. 'Higher tariffs mean higher prices for US consumers—and that will seriously dent EU companies' bottom lines,' said Alex Altmann, vice president of the British Chamber of Commerce in Germany. 'EU companies aiming to stay competitive in the US market will think twice when deciding where to produce or assemble.' The agreement also deals another blow to Detroit automakers, which objected to a similar deal the Trump administration reached with Japan. The 15% auto tariff on EU cars imported to the United States undercuts the 25% tariff American automakers pay if their cars are built in Mexico. Although von der Leyen said pharmaceuticals were included in the early framework, she acknowledged that Trump may ultimately place higher tariffs on drugs imported to the United States, undercutting the agreement. Still, in the eyes of the hard-working negotiators — and for the sake of the global economy — a deal is better than no deal. Now comes the hard part: figuring out the details.
Wall Street Journal
9 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Trump and the EU Dodge a Trade War
The U.S. and Europe stepped back from the brink of a trade war Sunday, as the two sides announced a deal that avoids tit-for-tat escalation that could do larger damage to both economies. President Trump and European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal as a major event, but that's true only as a relief. Mr. Trump had threatened a 30% tariff on European Union goods, while Europe had armed for a retaliatory strike on U.S. aircraft, cars, poultry, steel and much more. Europe also could have fired a bigger bazooka that included limits on U.S. investment and a big tax on U.S. companies operating on the continent.
CNN
9 minutes ago
- CNN
In a deal with Trump, Europe gets an elusive agreement. But everyone's a little annoyed
The United States and the European Union avoided the worst-case scenario: a damaging, all-out trade war between allies that threatened to raise prices on a large number of goods and slow two of the world's largest economies. The framework delivered a sense of relief for both sides – but few are cheering the arrangement itself. The agreement, which sets a 15% tariff on most European goods entering the United States, is higher than the 10% tariff Trump put in place on April 2 and significantly higher than the average of around 2% from before Trump's presidency. But it's significantly less than the enormous numbers Trump had been threatening if an agreement wasn't reached. A deal with the United States felt like an impossibility in late May. Frustrated by a lack of progress in negotiations with the 27-member European Union, Trump on May 24 told the world he was done talking to some of America's strongest allies. 'Our discussions with them are going nowhere!' Trump posted on Truth Social. 'I'm not looking for a deal,' he said later that day in the Oval Office. 'We've set the deal — it's at 50%.' The statement — and the shockingly high tariff threat — stunned European trade negotiators and rallied Europe's leaders into action. They quickly agreed to kick talks into high gear. Trump, who has taken a particular liking to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, was swayed after she called him to say the EU would commit to moving 'swiftly and decisively.' Trump soon backed off his threat and said negotiations would continue. But a deal between the United States and the European Union, one of America's top trading partners, had remained elusive for months. The two sides squabbled over America's insistence on high tariffs for steel and aluminum, looming tariffs on pharmaceuticals and the tariff floor for virtually all goods that the Trump administration appears set to raise to 15%. Negotiators were unable to come up with a resolution before the initial July 9 deadline — one of the reasons the Trump administration postponed the effective day for its 'reciprocal' tariffs to August 1. With just days to go before the extended deadline, while Trump was visiting Scotland, he met with van der Leyen and finalized a framework for an agreement — one that was thin on details, heavy on caveats, but was nevertheless a hard-sought relief for both sides. With the agreement in place, two of the world's largest economies avoided a potential economically crippling trade war. The United States held a 50% tariff threat over Europe's head, and Europe threatened America with strategic retaliatory tariffs that threatened to damage key US industries. Both sides appeared to embrace the fact that a deal was in place more than they celebrated it. 'We made it,' Trump said while announcing the deal with von der Leyen. 'It's going to work out really well.' 'I think we hit exactly the point we wanted to find,' von der Leyen said. 'Rebalance but enable trade on both sides. Which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic and that was important for us.' Markets cheered, somewhat: Dow futures rose 150 points, or 0.3%, poised to open near record territory. S&P 500 futures gained 0.3% and Nasdaq futures were 0.4% higher. The United States and Europe 'seem to have avoided a self-destructive trade war for now in the biggest and deepest commercial and investment relationship the global economy knows,' said Jörn Fleck, senior director of the Atlantic Council's Europe Center. Nevertheless, the details remain murky. Europe will increase its investment in the United States by $600 billion and commit to buying $750 billion worth of US energy products. It eliminates tariffs on a variety of items, including aircraft and plane parts, semiconductors, generic drugs and some chemicals and agricultural products. Industries in the zero-tariff arrangement cheered. 'The zero-for-zero tariff regime will grow jobs, strengthen our economic security and provide a framework for U.S. leadership in manufacturing and safety,' Airlines for America said in a statement. But the 15% baseline tariff applies to most goods, so the EU member states – and American importers — will have to come to terms with the fact that higher tariffs will raise prices for European goods in America. 'Higher tariffs mean higher prices for US consumers—and that will seriously dent EU companies' bottom lines,' said Alex Altmann, vice president of the British Chamber of Commerce in Germany. 'EU companies aiming to stay competitive in the US market will think twice when deciding where to produce or assemble.' The agreement also deals another blow to Detroit automakers, which objected to a similar deal the Trump administration reached with Japan. The 15% auto tariff on EU cars imported to the United States undercuts the 25% tariff American automakers pay if their cars are built in Mexico. Although von der Leyen said pharmaceuticals were included in the early framework, she acknowledged that Trump may ultimately place higher tariffs on drugs imported to the United States, undercutting the agreement. Still, in the eyes of the hard-working negotiators — and for the sake of the global economy — a deal is better than no deal. Now comes the hard part: figuring out the details.
