A Reagan-appointed federal judge just delivered a scorching, 161-page takedown of the Trump administration’s crackdown on pro-Palestinian student activists, calling it an “unconstitutional conspiracy” to chill free speech and suppress political dissent.
U.S. District Judge William G. Young, based in Boston, ruled in a lawsuit brought by faculty groups and students challenging the government’s arrests, detentions, visa revocations, and deportation efforts targeting noncitizen campus activists.
Young said the administration’s actions targeted protected political speech and violated the First Amendment, describing the effort as “breathtaking” and constitutionally baseless. He singled out Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, accusing them of using the power of their offices in ways that “strike fear into people” and deter lawful protest.
The judge also emphasized that noncitizens who are lawfully in the United States still have First Amendment rights — and that deporting or retaliating against someone because of their political views is unconstitutional.
Young returned to the spotlight Thursday in Boston, signaling that he may soon issue a new order limiting the Trump administration’s actions against pro-Palestinian campus activists and the academics who defend them.
Young previously ruled in September that the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security violated the First Amendment by detaining and attempting to deport noncitizens for their speech on college campuses.
Now, he is expected to issue an order to stop retaliation against academics who challenged what Reuters described as the arrest, detention, and deportation of noncitizen pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel activists at U.S. universities.
Mediaite continues:
Politico’s Kyle Cheney quoted Judge Young arguing that “There was no policy here. What happened here is an unconstitutional conspiracy to pick off certain people, to twist the laws.”
“Two cabinet secretaries conspired … they intentionally, knowing what they were doing, counseled by professionals who cautioned them, nevertheless went ahead to pick off these people with the intention that your clients would be chilled. And did so rather effectively, by the way,” Judge Young concluded, accusing Secretary of State Marco Rubio and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem of unconstitutional actions.
“These cabinet secretaries have failed in their duty to uphold the Constitution,” Young continued, adding:
I listened to professional patriotic employees of our United States government trying hard to do the job that they were trained and skilled in doing. I am trying very hard not to make their job harder. But let’s talk the truth here. The truth is – look at the intelligence portion of the Department of Homeland Security. If ever you want chapter and verse about how the government can be weaponized against a disfavored group, that’s the record of it.
These professionals were taken off anti-terrorist investigations. They were taken off human trafficking investigations all to look up … what dirt they could find on this group … the very highest levels of the DHS decided – that’s the best use of those people.
Young said his order would apply only to academic associations that sued the administration over its actions, including the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association.
The Trump administration has rejected the accusations, arguing that immigration law grants the executive branch broad authority over visas and removals, particularly in the name of public safety and national security.
The ruling is likely to be appealed, but it could shape future debates about whether immigration enforcement can be used as a tool to police political speech.
READ NEXT: UK Set To Approve Chinese ‘Super Embassy’ In London Despite Security Concerns
More judicial activism to hamper a duly elected President exercising the powers of the office.
These judges need to. Learn to stay within there defined roles and not try to be “president “
Hmm – key phrase IMHO is “non-citizens lawfully in the US” – apparently this old judge doesn’t realize that a LOT of the ‘protesters’ are NOT here ‘lawfully’. That is a very big distinction that he is ignoring in his broad brush ‘decision’. Many (most?) of us have no real issue with reasonable protests, at least not until they start interfering with free travel and causing negative impact on businesses. There ain’t anything in the First Amendment that allows anything except “peaceful” protests. Far too many of the protests trample all over other people’s right to go about their personal affairs. Show me where I am wrong.
Meanwhile, that reprobate didn’t say an effing word when patriotic Americans were sent to gulags for rightfully speaking out about a STOLEN PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.
He belongs in the effing gulag, that bastard.
So now noncitizens are covered by our constitution? Since when?
The key phrase here is “noncitizen campus activists”. These noncitizens have no rights whatsoever under our Constitution and should be returned to their hellhole of a country as soon as possible.