Latest news with #KnightFirstAmendmentInstitute
CNN
28-05-2025
- General
- CNN
‘Incredibly damaging' for the United States: Columbia professor on US pausing foreign student visas
Jameel Jaffer, Executive Director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, talks to Bianna Golodryga about the U.S. State Department pausing visa applications for international students.
E&E News
14-05-2025
- Politics
- E&E News
USDA, reversing course, will post climate information for farmers
The Trump administration has reversed course and will restore U.S. Department of Agriculture websites related to climate change in response to a lawsuit brought by environmental organizations and farmers. Groups represented by Earthjustice and the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University had sued in February, alleging that the removal of climate-related policies, datasets and other resources violated federal laws requiring advanced notice, reasoned decision-making and public access to certain information. In a letter late Monday, the administration told Judge Margaret Garnett of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York that the USDA will restore the climate-related web content that was removed after President Donald Trump's inauguration, including all USDA webpages and interactive tools listed in the lawsuit. Advertisement It noted that the process of restoring the removed content was already underway and that the USDA expects to mostly complete the process in two weeks. The USDA also pledged that it 'commits to complying with' federal law governing future 'posting decisions.'
Al Jazeera
09-04-2025
- Politics
- Al Jazeera
Judge orders White House to restore media access to US news agency
A federal judge has ordered the White House to restore full access to The Associated Press (AP) to report on presidential events, almost two months after the news agency was banned by US President Donald Trump for refusing to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America in its reports. On Tuesday, United States District Judge Trevor N McFadden, who was appointed by President Trump, ruled that it would be a violation of the US Constitution's First Amendment free speech rights if the government discriminates against news organisations for the content of their reports. 'Under the First Amendment, if the Government opens its doors to some journalists – be it to the Oval Office, the East Room, or elsewhere – it cannot then shut those doors to other journalists because of their viewpoints,' McFadden wrote in his ruling. 'The Constitution requires no less,' he said. 'It does not bestow special treatment upon the AP,' he wrote. 'But it cannot be treated worse than its peer wire service either.' McFadden also said this decision does not ban government officials from choosing which outlets to give interviews or answers to. It was not known when the White House would abide by the judge's ruling, which will not be implemented for a week to give the government time to respond or appeal. 'The decision, while a preliminary injunction, handed the AP a major victory at a time the White House has been challenging the press on several levels,' the news organisation said in a report on the judge's ruling. The AP's win comes after Trump called the news agency 'radical left lunatics' following the organisation's refusal to adjust its reporting in line with Trump's executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico. 'We're going to keep them out until such time as they agree it's the Gulf of America,' Trump said at the time. AP spokeswoman Lauren Easton said the news agency is 'gratified by the court's decision', and said the ruling 'affirms the fundamental right of the press and public to speak freely without government retaliation'. Katie Fallow, deputy litigation director at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said, 'the First Amendment means the White House can't ban news outlets from covering the president simply because they don't parrot his preferred language'. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who was named in the lawsuit along with White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles and Deputy Chief of Staff Taylor Budowich, did not immediately comment on the matter. Despite the win, the AP reported on Tuesday that one of its reporters and a photographer were turned away from joining a motorcade with the White House press pool shortly after the ruling.
Yahoo
02-04-2025
- Yahoo
School Surveillance Systems Threaten Student Privacy, New Knight Institute Lawsuit Alleges
Getty Images What happens when the era of AI-powered surveillance coincides with an authoritarian assault on public education? The transparency needed to answer that question does not exist, which is why the Knight First Amendment Institute, where I work, has filed a lawsuit seeking information about how one school district uses surveillance systems to monitor student laptops. It is estimated that millions of children — nearly half of K-12 students across the nation, according to a recent New York Times report —are subject to digital surveillance systems that can potentially monitor every word or phrase they type on school-issued laptops, tablets, and software. These software systems, supplied to school districts by private education technology companies like GoGuardian, Gaggle, and Lightspeed, scan students' communications, internet searches, and assignments, searching for keywords or phrases that may indicate cyberbullying, thoughts of self-harm, or thoughts of harming others. If a student uses a certain word or phrase deemed inappropriate by the vendor or the school district using the technology, administrators are notified and, in some instances, police get involved. The systems also have filtering capabilities, which can restrict students' access to certain websites and pages based on their content. Stay up-to-date with the politics team. Sign up for the Teen Vogue Take Given the widespread concerns about youth mental health, many people might view such digital surveillance as a godsend, a critical tool for combatting tragically high rates of youth suicide and depression, as well as school shootings. But that viewpoint likely rests on two assumptions: first, that the systems are as effective as the edtech industry claims, and second, that school districts are limiting the systems' purview to content that relates to student safety. It's not clear, however, that those assumptions have merit. The scant information we have about school surveillance suggests that the systems can lead to erroneous flags and can be used as a tool of overzealous surveillance by school administrators. Public records obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation have exposed several examples of students being flagged for innocuous visits to websites containing the text of Genesis from classic literature like Romeo and Juliet, and publications about Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights Movement. In other cases, surveillance of students' online activity has led to the unwanted disclosure of private details about their sexuality and the flagging or blocking of race-related content, according to a report from the Center for Democracy & Technology. And just last year, journalism students at a Lawrence, Kansas, high school successfully campaigned to get their files omitted from the purview of Gaggle, arguing that the school's use of the technology would have a chilling effect on critical reporting on district staff and administration. Despite the edtech industry's claims that their artificial intelligence products have saved thousands of students' lives, the Associated Press reports that no independent research has corroborated their efficacy. Industry data regarding the frequency and accuracy of the systems' alerts is usually kept hidden behind closed doors, exclusively in the hands of the for-profit companies that develop and market them. And while school districts maintain that their use of these tools is aimed at deterring self-harm, cyberbullying, and other harmful situations, their ability to customize the standard list of keywords and blocked websites provided by edtech companies raises serious concerns about the extent of surveillance and censorship school administrators can carry out, and the potential impact on students' privacy, speech, and associational rights. For example, school districts could easily block 'Black Lives Matter' websites, as at least one district reportedly did in the past, and flag any research or discussion of sexual orientation. In a moment where many children are prohibited from discussing racial history, learning about gender identity, or reading banned books in the classroom, it is critical that they have alternative channels for exploration and expression, including the internet and messaging platforms. Digital surveillance endangers both the sanctity of their private communications and their freedom to access more accurate, complex, and engaging ideas than their schools might permit. These concerns have intensified in recent weeks as the Trump administration escalates efforts to control how K-12 schools teach history, race, and gender. It's not clear what role, if any, schools' deeply entrenched surveillance capabilities will play in their efforts to comply, but it's important that the public knows about it. In an effort to learn more about how schools are monitoring our students, The Knight Institute submitted a records request to the Grapevine Colleyville Independent School District in Texas. The district has resisted our efforts to obtain information about student surveillance, claiming the records are statutorily exempt from disclosure. The district's position is that all information about the keywords and websites it monitors or blocks falls within the public records statute's computer network security exception, and disclosure of that information would expose the district's network to security threats. But it's not clear how transparency about the scope of student surveillance would lead to a security incident, and the district has offered no basis for its contention that it could. Until the public has access to this information, the extent of the district's monitoring remains unknown. We're hopeful that our new lawsuit succeeds in its efforts to compel the disclosure of this information at a critically important time. The public — particularly the students, parents, and teachers most directly impacted by this technology — deserves to know whether tools that purport to protect student safety are being exploited to stifle and censor student expression. Editor's note: Gaggle, GoGuardian, and the Grapevine Colleyville Independent School District did not respond to Teen Vogue's request for comment. In an email, Lightspeed chief of staff Amy Bennett said, 'Monitoring activity on district devices to keep students safe isn't just the right thing to do—it's also required by federal law under the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA). To minimize false alerts, Lightspeed Alert uses a combination of AI monitoring and trained human Safety Specialists.' Bennett added that their programs are 'built with Privacy by Design. We hide personally identifiable information (PII), share only the minimum data needed with only the personnel required, and fiercely secure our systems. And our AI is specifically trained to look for signs of distress and potential harm—not things like bad words or flirting.' Originally Appeared on Teen Vogue Check out more Teen Vogue education coverage: Affirmative Action Benefits White Women Most How Our Obsession With Trauma Took Over College Essays So Many People With Student Debt Never Graduated College The Modern American University Is a Right-Wing Institution
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Academic groups sue over deportations of international students, scholars
Multiple academic groups filed suit against the Trump administration Tuesday over its actions to deport foreign students and faculty who participated in pro-Palestinian protests on campuses. The American Association of University Professors, the Middle East Studies Association and Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University argue the administration has created an environment 'terrorizing students and faculty for their exercise of First Amendment rights in the past, intimidating them from exercising those rights now, and silencing political viewpoints that the government disfavors.' The federal government revoked the student visa of one Columbia student and is looking to take away the green card of another who participated in the pro-Palestinian demonstrations. The crackdown started with Mahmoud Khalil, a legal immigrant who graduated Columbia in December and was a lead negotiator of its pro-Palestinian encampment. Khalil was arrested by federal authorities and transferred to a facility in Louisiana, but he has not been accused of any crime amid the White House's efforts to deport him. 'The First Amendment means the government can't arrest, detain, or deport people for lawful political expression — it's as simple as that. This practice is one we'd ordinarily associate with the most repressive political regimes, and it should have no place in our democracy,' said Jameel Jaffer, executive director at the Knight First Amendment Institute. The federal government has argued it can strip the immigration status of foreign citizens who the secretary of State determines harms the nation's foreign policy. Only an immigration judge has the authority to remove a green card. The Hill has reached out to Department of Homeland Security for comment. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
