You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
A federal judge ruled Tuesday that a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to deport Pro-Palestinian protesters can move forward.
The American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association sued in March in order to block the deportations, arguing that what they called the ideological-deportation policy created a climate of repression and fear on college campuses. The plaintiffs challenged the plan on four counts, including that the policy violated the First and Fifth Amendments. The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University is representing the two organizations.
Government lawyers countered in court filings that no such policy existed, the organizations didn’t have standing to sue and the court didn’t have jurisdiction over immigration enforcement. They asked the Massachusetts district judge to throw out the case entirely.
But Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, declined to do so while dismissing the Fifth Amendment claim.
“Although this case raises novel First Amendment issues and the precise scope of the ideological-deportation policy challenged by the Plaintiffs is not yet clear, at the motion to dismiss stage the Plaintiffs’ First Amendment claims survive,” Young wrote. “It is well established that noncitizens have at least some First Amendment rights, and political speech is ‘at the core of what the First Amendment is designed to protect.’”
Tuesday’s ruling does not block the administration from deporting protesters—an action that’s the subject of other lawsuits. (At this stage in the lawsuit, the judge is required to consider the plaintiffs’ allegations as true and view them in the light most favorable for those suing.)
Young wrote that the government can’t deport lawful permanent residents solely because of their speech, and the administration’s “reliance on case law from the height of the second Red Scare era is misplaced.”
The plaintiffs praised the ruling in a news release.
“The government is impermissibly, unlawfully, and unconstitutionally targeting those engaging in pro-Palestine messaging through a policy that is intimidating its targets from engaging with protected political speech,” said Aslı Bâli, president of MESA. “We are gratified that the court will allow this case to go forward.”
