US judge rules Trump administration student deportations over political speech violate Constitution

Federal court ruling on free speech

U.S. District Judge Noel Wise ruled on 28 August 2026 that the Trump administration violated the U.S. Constitution by using federal immigration statutes to cancel visas and deport noncitizens for their political speech. The 90-page decision from the federal court in San Jose, California, determined that provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act deployed against pro-Palestinian campus advocates and critics of Israel breached the First and Fifth Amendments. Wise, an appointee of former President Joe Biden, found that the Department of State and the Department of Homeland Security unlawfully targeted noncitizens to suppress disfavored viewpoints. The decision followed findings issued nearly a year earlier by a federal judge in Boston who also ruled that targeting foreign nationals for Middle East commentary was unconstitutional.

Judge Wise addressed the constitutional principles governing public debate in the United States.

Stated plainly, in the United States, freedom of speech belongs to the people. It is not the government's to take.

Origins of the lawsuit and student self-censorship

The legal action was initiated in August 2025 by The Stanford Daily, the independent student newspaper at Stanford University. The publication argued that federal deportation policies chilled campus reporting, forcing student writers on visas to avoid covering Middle East demonstrations or publishing articles critical of the administration. Two anonymous plaintiffs with no criminal records joined the complaint, including a lawful noncitizen who deleted a social media account and stopped publishing personal views on Israel and Palestine to avoid deportation proceedings.

Judge Wise noted that constitutional protections extend to noncitizens living in the country.

That strength is diminished when members of our society - citizens and noncitizens alike - must self-censor and 'behave' or suffer the government's retaliation.

Targeted activists and campus crackdowns

The administration's deportation campaign began in March 2025, focusing on foreign nationals involved in campus activism. Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent resident and negotiator for student groups, was arrested and detained for more than three months. Following the ruling, Khalil posted on social media platform X that no one should fear speaking up for Palestine as he continues a separate legal challenge against his deportation. Other targeted figures included Columbia activist Mohsen Mahdawi, who was arrested during a citizenship interview, and Tufts University doctoral graduate Rümeysa Öztürk, who was detained by masked agents in Boston after co-authoring an op-ed. Georgetown University scholar Badar Khan Suri also faced deportation proceedings.

Judge Wise also noted federal retaliation against individuals who criticized Charlie Kirk after the Turning Point USA co-founder was assassinated in September 2025.

Legal arguments and discretionary authority

Under the challenged provisions, Secretary of State Marco Rubio was granted authority to declare noncitizens deportable if he personally concluded that their presence compromised a compelling foreign policy interest. Administration attorneys argued that the executive branch held wide discretion under immigration law to remove individuals whose actions conflicted with foreign policy goals. The court rejected that defense, finding that the statutory standards lacked clarity and singled out disfavored viewpoints for punishment.

Judge Wise concluded that allowing speech-based deportations would grant the government unchecked power to silence critics.

Here you can simultaneously hate the content of a person's speech and love the country that cherishes the freedom to allow it. Zealous protection of our Constitutional right to free speech is a provocative demonstration of our country's powerful lack of fear.