Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activists faces federal trial
The lawsuit, filed by several university associations against President Donald Trump and members of his administration, would be one of the first to go to trial. Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge William Young to rule the policy violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations.
"The policy's effects have been swift. Noncitizen students and faculty across the United States have been terrified into silence," the plaintiffs wrote in their pretrial brief.
"Students and faculty are avoiding political protests, purging their social media, and withdrawing from public engagement with groups associated with pro-Palestinian viewpoints," they wrote. "They're abstaining from certain public writing and scholarship they would otherwise have pursued. They're even self-censoring in the classroom."
Several scholars are expected to testify how the policy and subsequent arrests have prompted them to abandon their activism for Palestinian human rights and criticizing Israeli government's policies.
Since Trump took office, the U.S. government has used its immigration enforcement powers to crack down on international students and scholars at several American universities.
Trump and other officials have accused protesters and others of being "pro-Hamas," referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Many protesters have said they were speaking out against Israel's actions in the war.
Plaintiffs single out several activists by name, including Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was released last month after spending 104 days in federal immigration detention. Khalil has become a symbol of Trump 's clampdown on campus protests.
The lawsuit also references Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was released in May from a Louisiana immigration detention. She spent six weeks in detention after she was arrested walking on the street of a Boston suburb. She claims she was illegally detained following an op-ed she co-wrote last year that criticized the school's response to Israel's war in Gaza.
The plaintiffs also accuse the Trump administration of supplying names to universities who they wanted to target, launching a social media surveillance program and used Trump's own words in which he said after Khalil's arrest that his was the "first arrest of many to come."
The government argued in court documents that the plaintiffs are bringing a First Amendment challenge to a policy "of their own creation."
"They do not try to locate this program in any statute, regulation, rule, or directive. They do not allege that it is written down anywhere. And they do not even try to identify its specific terms and substance," the government argues. "That is all unsurprising, because no such policy exists."
They argue the plaintiffs case also rest on a "misunderstanding of the First Amendment, "which under binding Supreme Court precedent applies differently in the immigration context than it otherwise does domestically."
But plaintiffs counter that evidence at the trial will show the Trump administration has implemented the policy a variety of ways, including issuing formal guidance on revoking visas and green cards and establishing a process for identifying those involved in pro-Palestinian protests.
"Defendants have described their policy, defended it, and taken political credit for it," plaintiffs wrote. "It is only now that the policy has been challenged that they say, incredibly, that the policy does not actually exist. But the evidence at trial will show that the policy's existence is beyond cavil."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Mainichi
7 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Trump administration's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activists faces federal trial
BOSTON (AP) -- A federal bench trial begins Monday over a lawsuit that challenges a Trump administration campaign of arresting and deporting faculty and students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations and other political activities. The lawsuit, filed by several university associations against President Donald Trump and members of his administration, would be one of the first to go to trial. Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge William Young to rule the policy violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations. "The policy's effects have been swift. Noncitizen students and faculty across the United States have been terrified into silence," the plaintiffs wrote in their pretrial brief. "Students and faculty are avoiding political protests, purging their social media, and withdrawing from public engagement with groups associated with pro-Palestinian viewpoints," they wrote. "They're abstaining from certain public writing and scholarship they would otherwise have pursued. They're even self-censoring in the classroom." Several scholars are expected to testify how the policy and subsequent arrests have prompted them to abandon their activism for Palestinian human rights and criticizing Israeli government's policies. Since Trump took office, the U.S. government has used its immigration enforcement powers to crack down on international students and scholars at several American universities. Trump and other officials have accused protesters and others of being "pro-Hamas," referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Many protesters have said they were speaking out against Israel's actions in the war. Plaintiffs single out several activists by name, including Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was released last month after spending 104 days in federal immigration detention. Khalil has become a symbol of Trump 's clampdown on campus protests. The lawsuit also references Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was released in May from a Louisiana immigration detention. She spent six weeks in detention after she was arrested walking on the street of a Boston suburb. She claims she was illegally detained following an op-ed she co-wrote last year that criticized the school's response to Israel's war in Gaza. The plaintiffs also accuse the Trump administration of supplying names to universities who they wanted to target, launching a social media surveillance program and used Trump's own words in which he said after Khalil's arrest that his was the "first arrest of many to come." The government argued in court documents that the plaintiffs are bringing a First Amendment challenge to a policy "of their own creation." "They do not try to locate this program in any statute, regulation, rule, or directive. They do not allege that it is written down anywhere. And they do not even try to identify its specific terms and substance," the government argues. "That is all unsurprising, because no such policy exists." They argue the plaintiffs case also rest on a "misunderstanding of the First Amendment, "which under binding Supreme Court precedent applies differently in the immigration context than it otherwise does domestically." But plaintiffs counter that evidence at the trial will show the Trump administration has implemented the policy a variety of ways, including issuing formal guidance on revoking visas and green cards and establishing a process for identifying those involved in pro-Palestinian protests. "Defendants have described their policy, defended it, and taken political credit for it," plaintiffs wrote. "It is only now that the policy has been challenged that they say, incredibly, that the policy does not actually exist. But the evidence at trial will show that the policy's existence is beyond cavil."
Nikkei Asia
10 hours ago
- Nikkei Asia
Trump threatens extra 10% BRICS tariff as leaders meet in Brazil
RIO DE JANEIRO (Reuters) -- President Donald Trump said the U.S. will impose an additional 10% tariff on any countries aligning themselves with the "Anti-American policies" of the BRICS group of developing nations, whose leaders kicked off a summit in Brazil on Sunday. With forums such as the Group of Seven and Group of 20 major economies hamstrung by divisions and the disruptive "America First" approach of the U.S. president, the BRICS is presenting itself as a haven for multilateral diplomacy amid violent conflicts and trade wars. In a joint statement from the opening of the BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro released on Sunday afternoon, the group warned the rise in tariffs threatened global trade, continuing its veiled criticism of Trump's tariff policies. Hours later, Trump warned he would punish countries seeking to join with the grouping. "Any Country aligning themselves with the Anti-American policies of BRICS, will be charged an ADDITIONAL 10% Tariff. There will be no exceptions to this policy. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" Trump said in a post on Truth Social. Trump did not clarify or expand on the "Anti-American policies" reference in his post. Trump's administration is seeking to finalize dozens of trade deals with a wide range of countries before his Wednesday deadline for imposing significant "retaliatory" tariffs. The original BRICS group gathered leaders from Brazil, Russia, India and China at its first summit in 2009. The bloc later added South Africa and last year included Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates as members. Saudi Arabia has held off formally joining, according to sources, while another 30 nations have expressed interest in participating in BRICS, either as full members or partners. Airlangga Hartarto, Indonesia's senior economic minister, is in Brazil for the BRICS summit and is scheduled to go to the U.S. on Monday to oversee tariff talks, an official told Reuters. India's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In opening remarks to the summit earlier, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva drew a parallel with the Cold War's Non-Aligned Movement, a group of developing nations that resisted joining either side of a polarized global order. "BRICS is the heir to the Non-Aligned Movement," Lula told leaders. "With multilateralism under attack, our autonomy is in check once again." BRICS nations now represent more than half the world's population and 40% of its economic output, Lula noted in remarks on Saturday to business leaders, warning of rising protectionism. Expansion of the bloc has added diplomatic weight to the gathering, which aspires to speak for developing nations across the Global South, strengthening calls for reforming global institutions such as the United Nations Security Council and the International Monetary Fund. "If international governance does not reflect the new multipolar reality of the 21st century, it is up to BRICS to help bring it up to date," Lula said in his remarks, which highlighted the failure of U.S.-led wars in the Middle East. Stealing some thunder from this year's summit, Chinese President Xi Jinping chose to send his premier in his place. Russian President Vladimir Putin is attending online due to an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court related to his war in Ukraine. Still, several heads of state were gathered for discussions at Rio's Museum of Modern Art on Sunday and Monday, including Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. However, there are questions about the shared goals of an increasingly heterogeneous BRICS group, which has grown to include regional rivals along with major emerging economies. In the joint statement, the leaders called attacks against Iran's "civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities" a "violation of international law." The group expressed "grave concern" for the Palestinian people over Israeli attacks on Gaza, and condemned what the joint statement called a "terrorist attack" in India-administered Kashmir. The group voiced its support for Ethiopia and Iran to join the World Trade Organization, while calling to urgently restore its ability to resolve trade disputes. The leaders' joint statement backed plans to pilot a BRICS Multilateral Guarantees initiative within the group's New Development Bank to lower financing costs and boost investment in member states, as first reported by Reuters last week. In a separate statement following a discussion of artificial intelligence, the leaders called for protections against unauthorized use of AI to avoid excessive data collection and allow mechanisms for fair payment. Brazil, which also hosts the United Nations climate summit in November, has seized on both gatherings to highlight how seriously developing nations are tackling climate change, while Trump has slammed the brakes on U.S. climate initiatives. China and the UAE signaled in meetings with Brazilian Finance Minister Fernando Haddad in Rio that they plan to invest in a proposed Tropical Forests Forever Facility, according to two sources with knowledge of the discussions about funding the conservation of endangered forests around the world.
The Mainichi
10 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Editorial: In election, parties should discuss Japan's role in restoring rules-based order
With the return to power of U.S. President Donald Trump, who champions an America First policy, international order is being shaken, putting pressure on Japan to restructure its diplomatic and security policies. Each political party in Japan needs to present its strategy through debate in the upcoming House of Councillors election. Postwar Japan has relied on U.S. deterrence for security, and achieved economic growth under a free trade system. However, the Trump administration views alliances as liabilities rather than assets, and the relationship that has been the linchpin of the alliance is creaking under the strain. Washington has imposed high tariffs on even allies and has also demanded increased defense spending. The security environment surrounding Japan is becoming increasingly severe. China has continued with its military expansion, and is boosting its maritime advancements into the East and South China seas. Meanwhile, North Korea, which is accelerating its development of nuclear weapons and missiles, has formed a military alliance with Russia, which is continuing its war in Ukraine. The threat toward Japan is only increasing. Strains in the Japan-U.S. alliance A concern is that it remains uncertain just how much the U.S. aims to get involved in stabilizing East Asia. A U.S. Department of Defense spokesperson suggested that Asian allies, including Japan, should raise their defense-related spending to 5% of gross domestic product, similar to NATO member countries. Due to Russia's prolonged invasion of Ukraine, most European countries belonging to NATO have complied with U.S. requests. Japan has decided to increase its defense spending to 2% of GDP by fiscal 2027. Both the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan have pledged to "fundamentally strengthen defense capabilities," but they have not provided a blueprint showing how far they intend to go. Japan should not be preparing defense capabilities based on numerical targets in the first place. Rather, it is essential to first accurately assess the military capabilities and intentions of neighboring countries and identify threats. Strategies should then be developed to address these threats, and the necessary equipment and other items should be selected accordingly. Addressing personnel shortages in the Self-Defense Forces due to Japan's declining birth rate is another urgent matter. Increasing defense spending could impact other policies like social security. There should be in-depth discussions about the appropriate scale relative to national strength. In light of China's moves to increase military pressure, such as its deployment of two aircraft carriers in the Western Pacific, it is important to maintain deterrence. But rather than just strengthening defense capabilities, efforts need to be made to build a stable relationship with repeated talks so as not to heighten tensions. Negotiations between Tokyo and Washington over high tariffs have cast a shadow over Japan's upper house election. Trump's approach not only undermines Japan's national interests but also threatens to disrupt global supply chains for goods and services. A strategy to uphold the free trade system is necessary. The European Union is cooperating with member countries of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership to establish new trade rules. Japan, having benefited from free trade, should take an active role. Strategy to strengthen alliance needed The goal should be multilateral diplomacy. To restore international order damaged by ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East and Trump's high-handed tariff policies, it is essential for middle powers like Japan and Europe to band together. Japan must further strengthen ties with countries sharing values of freedom and democracy, such as Australia and South Korea, as well as with members of emerging and developing countries collectively known as the Global South, including India and those in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). While the words and actions of Trump, who is prioritizing his own country, have shaken the prestige of the United States, China is increasing its presence in Asia. It is leveraging geoeconomic strategies like the Belt and Road Initiative and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to draw in ASEAN countries targeted by high tariffs. Japan has built trust with Asian countries since the postwar period through economic assistance and other such measures. It is crucial to leverage this experience to contribute to regional stability. There is concern that Japan's commitment to the rule of law, which it has valued, and other principles is weakening. If Japan cannot bring itself to criticize the self-righteous actions of Trump, who believes in "peace through strength," out of consideration for him, it will only lose the trust of the Global South. While maintaining its important relationship with the U.S., which is crucial for Japan's security and economy, efforts to restore a rules-based international order are indispensable. Each party should engage in robust discussions on the role Japan should play in achieving this.
