US judge orders release of Turkish student detained in immigration case
A US judge on Friday ordered the release of a Turkish student detained by federal agents as part of President Donald Trump's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activism.
Judge William Sessions said Rumeysa Ozturk, a Ph.D student at Tufts University in Massachusetts, should be released "immediately" from custody while her removal proceedings continue.
Ozturk's student visa was revoked by the State Department after she co-authored an article in the university newspaper The Tufts Daily criticizing the college's handling of student anger around Israel's war in Gaza.
Video of her March 25 arrest by masked agents on a sidewalk sparked outrage online, and added to concerns about freedom of speech and respect for due process under Trump.
Sessions echoed the concerns during Friday's live-streamed custody hearing, at which Ozturk appeared remotely from a detention center in Louisiana.
"Continued detention potentially chills the speech of the millions and millions of individuals in this country who are not citizens," the judge said.
"Any one of them may now avoid exercising their First Amendment rights for fear of being whisked away to a detention center from their home," he said.
"The court finds that her continued detention cannot stand," Sessions said. "The court orders the government to release Miss Ozturk from custody immediately."
The judge said he was not putting any travel restrictions on Ozturk and she was free to return to her home in Massachusetts.
Ozturk is one of a number of foreign students facing deportation over their pro-Palestinian campus activities, and she still faces removal proceedings.
Tufts University has publicly backed Ozturk, demanding her release so she can return to the school and complete her doctoral studies in child development.
Jessie Rossman, legal director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, which was among the groups representing Ozturk, welcomed her release.
"For 45 days, Rumeysa has been detained in Louisiana," Rossman said. "During that time, she has suffered regular and escalating asthma attacks.
"And at the same time, the government has failed to produce any justification for her detention," Rossman said, adding that the ACLU "won't stop fighting until she is free for good."
Trump has targeted prestigious universities that became the epicenter of the US student protest movement sparked by Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza, stripping federal funds and directing immigration officers to deport foreign student demonstrators.
Critics argue that the campaign amounts to retribution and will have a chilling effect on free speech, while its supporters insist it is necessary to restore order to campuses and protect Jewish students.
sst/cl/sst
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A judge's dismissal of Justin Baldoni's $400 million defamation suit is a win for Blake Lively, but it's not 'game over'
Legal experts say Blake Lively has scored a key legal win against Justin Baldoni. A New York judge dismissed Baldoni's defamation case against Lively, Ryan Reynolds, and the NYT. Still, one expert told BI it's not "game over" for Baldoni since "the judge has granted him permission to amend his claim." Blake Lively just scored a major win in her ongoing legal battle with "It Ends With Us" director-costar Justin Baldoni, but the court fight isn't over yet. Legal experts told Business Insider the dismissal of Baldoni's $400 million defamation suit is an important win for Lively and her team, especially in a case where reputation is more at stake than money. "Even though it was a New York judge, the judge applied California law, and that's important because California is one of the most First Amendment-friendly states in the country," Neama Rahmani, a former federal prosecutor and cofounder of West Coast Trial Lawyers, told BI. Although the case was filed in New York, California laws apply because the events in question took place in the state. "The fact that the vast majority of the claims were dismissed with prejudice, which means that they can't be refiled, is a huge setback for Baldoni," Rahmani added. On Monday, a New York judge dismissed Baldoni's $400 million defamation countersuit against Lively, her husband Ryan Reynolds, and The New York Times. Baldoni argued that the parties conspired to destroy his career with false allegations after Lively filed a federal lawsuit against Baldoni, which accused him of sexual harassment and retaliation. In her complaint, Lively said that Baldoni and the producers of "It Ends With Us" orchestrated a smear campaign against her after she raised concerns about on-set conditions during the film's production. Baldoni has denied the allegations. A spokesperson for Lively said in a statement to BI that the lawsuit dismissal is "a total victory and a complete vindication" of the actor. "As we have said from day one, this '$400 million' lawsuit was a sham, and the Court saw right through it," said the spokesperson, who added that Lively plans to seek attorneys' fees, treble damages, and punitive damages from Baldoni and his associates. US District Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled that Lively's sexual harassment allegations in her lawsuit are legally protected speech. The judge also ruled Baldoni's allegations that Lively engaged in an extortion campaign to seize creative control of "It Ends With Us" from Baldoni did not qualify as civil extortion under California law. Liman says Baldoni can refile an amended suit against Lively regarding his contract breach and interference allegations. Baldoni has until June 23 to file that amended complaint. Baldoni's camp would not confirm to BI whether they would refile, but a statement from his attorney, Bryan Freedman, suggested that the director has plans to do just that. "Ms. Lively and her team's predictable declaration of victory is false, so let us be clear about the latest ruling. While the Court dismissed the defamation-related claims, the Court has invited us to amend four out of the seven claims against Ms. Lively, which will showcase additional evidence and refined allegations," Freedman said. Freedman added, "Most importantly, Ms. Lively's own claims are no truer today than they were yesterday, and with the facts on our side, we march forward with the same confidence that we had when Ms. Lively and her cohorts initiated this battle and look forward to her forthcoming deposition, which I will be taking." Camron Dowlatshahi of MSD Lawyers, who specializes in sexual harassment cases, told BI that the judge's dismissal is still a major victory for Lively at a very early stage of the case. "Baldoni can amend his complaint to properly allege a cause of action for defamation," said Dowlatshahi. "His amended complaint will likely face another motion to dismiss and cannot manufacture facts, so it remains to be seen whether Baldoni can get to the discovery stage of his case." Lively's lawsuit against Baldoni is still pending and could proceed to trial. Amber Melville-Brown, a media law specialist and partner at Withers, told BI there may be some hope left for Baldoni if he targets Lively's statements made outside her complaint, which may be less protected. "Libel litigation can be akin to spinning the roulette wheel or sitting down to a game of chance," said Melville-Brown. "So while Baldoni may have lost in this latest hand, it doesn't mean all bets are off. It's not necessarily game over because the judge has granted him permission to amend his claim." "That said, and I'm not a gambler myself. If he didn't play his strongest cards at the outset, it's not easy to see that he's going to come up with a winning hand second time around," Melville-Brown added. Read the original article on Business Insider
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? 'We'll see,' he says
Will Trump invoke the Insurrection Act? 'We'll see,' he says Show Caption Hide Caption Anti-ICE raid demonstrators protest into fourth night Anti-immigration raid protests are continuing into the fourth night as the Pentagon deployed active-duty U.S. Marines. President Donald Trump mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which would give him more leeway to use the military for domestic purposes, as he deploys troops to Los Angeles in response to protests prompted by ICE raids in the region. "If there's an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it,' Trump said June 10 during an event in the White House. 'We'll see. But I can tell you, last night was terrible. The night before that was terrible." Trump deployed the California National Guard to Los Angeles over the objection of Gov. Gavin Newsom, sparking a lawsuit from the state. Marines were also sent to help the guard after protests erupted over his immigration enforcement efforts. The troops are limited to protecting federal property and law enforcement officers. The Insurrection Act would give Trump authority to use them more broadly. More: 'High-stakes game': Trump-Newsom clash pits two political heavyweights Trump said there were parts of Los Angeles on June 9 where "you could have called it an insurrection. It was terrible." Newsom described Trump's actions as "the acts of a dictator" and accused the president of 'inciting and provoking violence,' 'creating mass chaos,' and 'militarizing cities.' Legal experts say invoking the Insurrection Act is an extreme step. It has been done 30 times in U.S. history. "The invocation of it would be viewed as a pretty dramatic act," said Duke Law Professor H. Jefferson Powell. Powell said the law is "dangerously broad." The last time the Insurrection Act was invoked was in May 1992, by President George H.W. Bush at the request of California's governor, to quell rioting in Los Angeles after four White police officers were acquitted for beating Black motorist Rodney King.
Yahoo
23 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What the 'Big, Beautiful' tax bill means for municipal bonds
JPMorgan raised its forecast for municipal bond sales in 2025 to $560 billion as US lawmakers deliberate over President Trump's "big, beautiful" tax and spending bill in the Senate. Goldman Sachs Asset Management co-head of municipal fixed income Sylvia Yeh weighs in on what policy changes to the US tax code could mean for municipal bond investors, as well as valuation catalysts in comparison to Treasury yields (^TYX, ^TNX, ^FVX). Goldman Sachs manages several municipal bond ETFs (GMUB, GCAL, GMNY, GUMI). To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Catalysts here. Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
