State Department memo says Rümeysa Öztürk has no association to antisemitism or terrorism
Advertisement
Öztürk, who is from Turkey, was
'A visa is a privilege not a right. Glorifying and supporting terrorists who kill Americans is grounds for visa issuance to be terminated. This is commonsense security,' the statement said.
Advertisement
Öztürk,
In court on Friday, Conlon asserted that the action memo laid out that DHS, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Homeland Security Investigations (which is an arm of ICE) have 'not provided any evidence' about Öztürk taking part in anti-semitic activity or publicly expressing support for a terrorist group. Öztürk was held
Armstrong previously testified that Öztürk was not informed that her visa was being revoked, following guidance from ICE officials.
Over the past two weeks, new revelations have come to light during the trial about the federal government's effort to investigate, surveil, and arrest student protesters involved in Pro-Palestinian activism, including: Öztürk, Mahmoud Khalil, Mohsen Mahdawi, Badar Khan Suri, a postdoctoral scholar and professor at Georgetown University, and Columbia University student Yunseo Chung.
Last week, an immigration official
Advertisement
On Friday, Conlon pressed Armstrong about the reasons behind the decision to revoke Öztürk's visa, given that DHS did not find evidence linking her to terrorist groups, according to the memo described in court.
Armstrong testified that it was 'not just' an
op-ed that Öztürk co-wrote in the student newspaper, calling on Tufts to divest from companies with ties to Israel, that led the State Department to take away her visa.
What was included in his decision 'were her actions,' Armstrong said, 'which are not speech,' including protesting Tufts' relationship with Israel. He also alleged that she was associated with Tufts Students for Justice in Palestine, a group that he said has created a 'hostile environment for Jewish students' on the Tufts camps, and has indicated support for a designated terrorist organization. He did not point to evidence of what he called her 'connection' with the group.
Armstrong acknowledged that Öztürk's case was 'complicated,' and said that he had spent a significant amount of time reviewing it. 'I thought long and hard about Ms. Öztürk's case,' Armstrong said. 'A revocation is a serious decision.'
Giulia McDonnell Nieto del Rio can be reached at
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
9 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Democrats demand U.S. investigation of American's death in West Bank
Nearly 30 Senate Democrats are urging the Trump administration to investigate the recent death of an American citizen in the West Bank. In a letter addressed to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday, the senators criticized what they labeled a 'culture of impunity when it comes to incidents where civilians have been killed in the West Bank, including Americans.' Sayfollah Kamel Musallet, 20, of Tampa, was killed July 11 while visiting family in the occupied West Bank. Palestinian health authorities and Musallet's family have said Israeli settlers are responsible for his death. Shortly after Musallet was killed, the Israel Defense Forces said it was examining reports of a death during a confrontation between Israelis and Palestinians in the area. Spokespeople for the Israeli embassy in Washington and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The State Department declined to comment. The senators' letter, a copy of which was obtained by The Washington Post, was signed by 29 lawmakers, accounting for more than half of the chamber's Democrats. No Republicans have joined the effort. Three other Palestinian Americans have died in the West Bank since the Israel-Gaza war began in October 2023. Democratic members of Congress have objected to the wave of settler violence, arguing that American citizens are falling victim. The U.S. government 'has failed in its responsibility to protect American citizens overseas and demand justice for their deaths,' the letter states. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland), the letter's lead author, has called for similar investigations in the past. He has emerged as a vocal critic of settler violence and the Israeli government's response to it. His office shared responses to similar requests made of the Biden administration, which show officials offered little further information about the deaths but committed to speaking with Israel's government about them. At a Senate hearing earlier this month to evaluate President Donald Trump's nomination of Michael Waltz, the former White House national security adviser, to become ambassador to the United Nations, Van Hollen criticized the Trump administration's decision to revoke sanctions imposed by the Biden administration targeting Israeli settlers in the West Bank whom the U.S. government at the time deemed extremists. 'When you withdrew that executive order, you sent a very bad signal,' Van Hollen said then. An April analysis by the Washington Institute, a think tank, found that Israeli settler violence has surged in the last year, rising 30 percent in the first part of the year, compared with the same period the year before. Meanwhile, Palestinian terrorism in the same area has sharply declined, the analysis found. 'The increase in settler violence at a time when Palestinian terrorism is decreasing lends credence to the assessment that settler attacks are not simply a response to terrorism, as some have claimed,' the study's author, Neomi Neumann, wrote. The Trump administration has taken a complicated approach to Israel since entering office in January. At times, it has shown frustration with Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu for the inability to reach a peace deal in Gaza, which has been afflicted by violence and famine nearly two years into the war. Notwithstanding, top Israeli officials have visited Washington multiple times in the last six months, and Trump authorized the U.S. military to join Israeli forces in an attack on Iran's nuclear program in mid-June, fulfilling one of Netanyahu's core priorities. Heidi Levine, Miriam Berger and Marie-Rose Sheinerman contributed to this report.
The Hill
10 minutes ago
- The Hill
Most Americans support legal access to abortions in most cases: Survey
Most Americans still support legal abortions despite a wave of rollbacks following the Supreme Court's decision overturning the federal right to access the procedure over three years ago, a new survey shows. The AP-NORC Research Center poll, published Thursday, revealed that 64 percent of participants said abortion should be legal in all or most cases. About 27 percent of people said the procedure should be illegal in most cases and 9 percent said it should be illegal in all cases. The results were split along party lines. A majority of Democrats, 85 percent, and independents, 67 percent, said they believe abortion should be lawfully permitted in cases of medically terminated pregnancies and use of an abortion pill. On the opposite side, 15 percent of Democrats and 33 percent of independents disagreed, according to the survey. More than half, 58 percent, of Republicans said abortion should be illegal in all or most cases, while 41 percent of GOP respondents shared an opposite view. The poll also found that an overwhelming majority of respondents, regardless of their political party, said abortions should be allowed if the mother's health is at risk due to pregnancy or in the case of rape, incest or potential fetal abnormality. As states reflect on the impact of the 2022 Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health case — which overturned Roe v. Wade — the survey asked in which cases should medical abortions should be approved. Around 70 percent said abortions, which have increased since the landmark ruling, should be allowed in cases of maternal medical emergencies. A small majority, 56 percent, also said mothers should be permitted to travel to obtain an abortion in a different state if it's illegal where they reside. The AP-NORC poll was conducted from July 10-14 featuring 1,437 U.S. adults. The overall margin of error is plus or minus 3.6 percentage points.
Axios
10 minutes ago
- Axios
U.S. trade agreement with Japan includes $550 billion in unanswered questions
One key element of the U.S.-Japan trade pact raises more questions than answers about the future of the two nations' economic relationship. The big picture: A reported $550 billion investment commitment from Japan would reflect a massive surge in the nation's financial exposure to the United States. But no one in either the Japanese or U.S. government has articulated key details about how it would really work. In U.S. officials' description of the commitments, President Trump would have the discretion to direct the investment funds and the U.S. would receive 90% of the profits. It's unclear what legal entities — on either the Japanese or U.S. side — would be involved, or what would be in it for Japanese companies if they have neither control over the investments nor a financial return. Catch up quick: A White House fact sheet said Trump will direct the funds toward revitalization of the U.S. industrial base, including energy infrastructure, semiconductor manufacturing, critical minerals, pharmaceuticals and shipbuilding. By the numbers: It's worth emphasizing just how big $550 billion is — nearly 14% of Japan's 2024 GDP. Japan is already the single-largest source of foreign direct investment in the United States, with a cumulative capital of $754 billion deployed as of last year. It's been rising rapidly, too — nearly doubling over the last decade. Reality check: That has been driven by Japanese companies voluntarily making investments on which they expect to earn a handsome return — think of the Toyota manufacturing plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, which reflects about $10 billion in investment as of early last year. But those kinds of projects don't spin up overnight. The initial groundbreaking on the Toyota plant was in 1986. Japanese FDI in the U.S. increased by about $54 billion in 2024, a huge 7.7% surge, but the contemplated investment fund is more than 10 times that size. Similarly, Japan is the biggest owner of U.S. Treasury securities — with $1.1 trillion as of May. But those purchases are directed by the Japanese government to manage the nation's own currency and reserves, not at the behest of the U.S. president. The Bank of Japan buys U.S. bonds with the full expectation of interest earnings and principal being paid back. What they're saying: "They came to us with the idea of a Japan-U.S. partnership, where they are going to provide equity, credit guarantees and funding for major projects in the U.S.," Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday on Bloomberg TV. A White House official tells Axios that "the shape and timeframe here are still TBD, but it's effectively an investment vehicle whose cash the Japanese will put up, and whose investments will be directed by the President into the sectors we have prioritized." The other side: "The vague promises about Japan investing $550 billion in the U.S. and Americans receiving '90% of the profits,' are the kind of fantastical claims better suited for a campaign rally than a serious trade announcement," wrote Veronique de Rugy, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center, in a note.
