Judge Bars Deportations Over Pro-Palestinian Speech

A California federal judge ruled the Trump administration unconstitutionally targeted international students for deportation over speech criticizing.

Federal Judge Noël Wise of the Northern District of California ruled Friday that the Trump administration unconstitutionally silenced critics of Israel's war in Gaza when it sought to deport noncitizens who expressed pro-Palestinian views on college campuses. Wise struck down portions of the deportation provisions on free-speech grounds and on vagueness grounds, finding violations of both the First Amendment and the Fifth Amendment. The ruling was a victory for The Stanford Daily, the student newspaper at Stanford University, which argued that international students were afraid to speak out because of the deportation threat. According to Common Dreams, the judge wrote, "Stated plainly, in the United States, freedom of speech belongs to the people. It is not the government's to take."

The decision is notable for how squarely it confronts the legal basis for what critics called "ideological deportations." According to Common Dreams, FIRE — the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which brought the lawsuit — called it the "first in the country to squarely rule on the constitutionality of these statutes" and said it would "reverberate in similar proceedings around the country." The suit challenged two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act that Secretary of State Marco Rubio used to justify seeking deportations of Mahmoud Khalil, Columbia student Mohsen Mahdawi, and Tufts student Rümeysa Öztürk. One provision lets the secretary of state deport a noncitizen if he "personally determines" their speech "compromises a compelling foreign policy interest"; the other allows visa revocation entirely at his discretion. Wise found both unconstitutional.

Judge Wise wrote that the government's tactics had a measurable effect on college campuses. "The government has offered a chilling message regarding protected speech — speak out against Israel or in support of Palestinians and we will revoke your visa and deport you. Behave. Noncitizen students heard the warning and heeded. And, as the idiom goes, the silence is deafening," she wrote. At The Stanford Daily, she noted that lawfully present noncitizens had quit, withheld articles, refused assignments, requested articles be taken down, and asked for anonymity out of fear of adverse immigration consequences. She emphasized that noncitizens hold the same First Amendment rights as citizens, yet were left guessing what U.S. foreign policy permitted at any given moment — an "incomprehensible standard," in her words.

George Porteous, editor-in-chief of The Stanford Daily, welcomed the decision: "The reporters in our newsroom shouldn't have to fear that writing a story will result in their deportation. Today's victory means they won't have to," he wrote on X. Conor Fitzpatrick, the FIRE attorney who argued the case, said, "In America, free speech doesn't just belong to the people who say things the government agrees with." According to Common Dreams, Mahmoud Khalil — the Columbia student and green card holder detained by ICE early in the administration — celebrated on social media, writing that no one should fear speaking up for Palestine, while the Council on American-Islamic Relations said the ruling reaffirms that students do not surrender constitutional rights at the classroom door.

Beyond the students involved, Wise framed the case as a warning about expanding government retaliation against disfavored speech. She cited immigration authorities' March 2025 retaliation against people who spoke in support of Palestinians, and also cited retaliation against people who criticized Charlie Kirk after the Turning Point USA co-founder was assassinated last September. "Tomorrow, or perhaps even today, targets may include anyone in the United States who exercises their freedom of speech to simply express opinions the government does not like," she wrote, calling the downward spiral "antithetical to our Constitution." She added that one can "simultaneously hate the content of a person's speech and love the country that cherishes the freedom to allow it."

The ruling builds on findings from nearly a year ago by a U.S. district judge in Boston, who ruled that the administration violated the Constitution when it targeted noncitizens for deportation solely for supporting Palestinians and criticizing Israel. Wise also acknowledged that while the government holds considerable discretion on foreign policy and immigration, that discretion must still ensure ordinary people can understand what the law permits and prohibits. FIRE's assessment that the decision will reverberate in similar proceedings around the country suggests additional challenges to ideological deportation efforts are likely to follow.