🔗 Share this article

When federal agents detained the university student a student activist in his campus housing, the institute director knew a major battle was coming.

The director heads a Columbia-affiliated institute dedicated to protecting free speech protections. The student, a green card holder, had been active in pro-Palestinian protests on campus. Months earlier, Jaffer's organization had organized a conference about free speech rights for immigrants.

"We felt this connection with this situation, since we're part of the university," Jaffer explained. "And we saw this detention as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Landmark Victory Against Administration

Recently, the institute's lawyers at the Knight First Amendment Institute, together with the law firm Sher Tremonte, secured a landmark victory when a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that the detention and attempted deportation of the student and other pro-Palestinian students was unconstitutional and purposely created to chill free speech.

Government officials announced they'll challenge the verdict, with administration representative Liz Huston describing the judgment an "unacceptable decision that undermines the protection of our nation".

Increasing Separation Separating Institute and Institution

This decision raised the profile of the free speech center, catapulting it to the frontlines of the battle with Trump over core constitutional principles. Yet the victory also highlighted the growing divide between the organization and the institution that houses it.

This legal challenge – characterized by the judge as "perhaps the most important to ever fall within the authority of this district court" – was the initial of multiple opposing the administration's unprecedented assault on higher education to go to trial.

Court Testimony

Throughout the court proceedings, citizen and noncitizen scholars testified about the climate of terror and silencing caused by the detentions, while immigration officials disclosed information about their dependence on dossiers by conservative, pro-Israel organizations to pick their targets.

Veena Dubal, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which filed the lawsuit along with some of its chapters and the academic group, called it "the central civil rights lawsuit of the Trump administration this time around".

'University and Institute Occupy Different Sides'

While the court victory was praised by supporters and academics nationwide, the director received no communication from university leadership following the ruling – a reflection of the disagreements in the stances taken by the institute and the institution.

Even before Trump took office, Columbia had come to symbolize the shrinking space for pro-Palestinian speech on US campuses after it called police to remove its campus protest, suspended dozens of students for their activism and dramatically restricted demonstrations on campus.

University Settlement

This summer, the university reached a deal with the federal government to provide substantial funds to settle discrimination allegations and submit to major restrictions on its independence in a action broadly criticized as "capitulation" to the president's bullying tactics.

Columbia's submissive approach was starkly at odds with the Knight Institute's principled position.

"We're at a moment in which the institution and the organization hold opposing views of some of these fundamental issues," observed a former fellow at the Knight Institute.

Organization's Purpose

The Knight Institute was launched in recent years and is housed on the university grounds. It has received substantial support from the institution as part of an arrangement that had each contributing substantial amounts in operating funds and long-term financing to launch it.

"Our vision for the institute in the long-term future is that when there is a time when the administration has gone in the wrong direction and constitutional protections are at stake and no one else is prepared to step forward and to say, enough is enough, that's when the this organization that will stepped forward," stated Lee Bollinger, a constitutional expert who established the center.

Public Criticism

Following recent events, the university and the Knight Institute found themselves on different sides, with the institute frequently objecting to the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both privately and in increasingly unforgiving official comments.

In correspondence to university leadership, the director condemned the action to suspend two student groups, which the institution said had violated policies concerning organizing protests.

Growing Conflict

Subsequently, the director further criticized the university's decision to summon police onto campus to remove a peaceful, student protest – resulting in the detention of numerous activists.

"The university's decisions have become separated from the principles that are central to the university's life and purpose – including free speech, scholarly independence, and fair treatment," he wrote in that instance.

Student Perspective

Khalil, in particular, had appealed to campus officials for protection, and in an op-ed composed while jailed he stated that "the reasoning used by the federal government to target me and fellow students is a direct extension of the university's suppression playbook regarding Palestinian issues".

Columbia reached agreement with the federal government just days after the trial concluded in court.

Organization's Reaction

Following the agreement was revealed, the Knight Institute published a scathing rebuke, concluding that the agreement approves "a remarkable shift of independence and authority to the government".

"Columbia's leaders ought not agreed to these terms," the declaration stated.

Broader Context

Knight doesn't stand alone – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the Foundation for Individual Rights and other civil liberties groups have challenged the government over free speech issues, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

Nor is it concentrating solely on campus issues – in other challenges to the government, the organization has filed cases on behalf of agricultural workers and environmental advocates challenging government agencies over climate-related datasets and fought the suppression of government documents.

Special Situation

However its defense of campus expression at a institution now associated with making concessions on it puts it in a uniquely uneasy situation.

Jaffer expressed sympathy for the lack of "favorable choices" for Columbia's leaders while he characterized their agreement as a "major error". But he emphasized that although the institute standing at the other side of its host when it comes to dealing with the president, the institution has permitted it to operate without interference.

"Especially right now, I don't take that freedom as automatic," he said. "Should the university attempt to restrict our work, I wouldn't remain at Columbia any more."