Freedom Under Fire: Trump Begins Targeting Campus Speech
By Kasturi Chakraborty
Trump is Silencing Pro-Palestinian Voices
Editor’s note: The opinions expressed here are those of the authors. View more opinion on ScoonTV
The recent arrest of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate, by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents marks an escalation in the Trump administration’s approach to dissent and free speech on college campuses. This move, which Trump himself has declared is “just the first of many,” sets a dangerous precedent that threatens the very foundations of academic freedom and the right to peaceful protest in America.
Khalil, a green card holder who played a key role in organizing pro-Palestinian demonstrations at Columbia last year, was apprehended in a manner that raises serious questions about due process and the politicization of immigration enforcement. The administration’s attempt to revoke his permanent residency status without clear legal grounds is not only an overreach of executive power but also a blatant attack on constitutionally protected forms of expression.
The crackdown on pro-Palestinian activism at Columbia University has expanded beyond Mahmoud Khalil’s arrest, with two more students facing severe consequences for their involvement in campus protests.
Leqaa Kordia, a Palestinian from the West Bank, was taken into custody by Homeland Security agents in Newark, New Jersey on Thursday. According to the Department of Homeland Security, Kordia had overstayed her student visa, which was terminated in January 2022 due to “lack of attendance”. She had previously been arrested in April 2024 for participating in protests at Columbia University.
Ranjani Srinivasan, an Indian doctoral candidate in Urban Planning at Columbia, also found herself at the center of the controversy when her student visa was abruptly revoked on March 5, 2025. The Department of Homeland Security accused Srinivasan of “advocating for violence and terrorism” and supporting Hamas, though no specific evidence has been publicly presented to substantiate these claims.
Faced with the threat of arrest and deportation, Srinivasan decided to “self-deport” using the newly launched CBP Home App on March 11. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem confirmed Srinivasan’s departure, stating,
It is a privilege to be granted a visa to live and study in the United States of America. When you advocate for violence and terrorism, that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.
Trump’s characterization of student protesters as paid provocateurs and his vow to “locate, apprehend, and deport these sympathizers of terrorism” is inflammatory rhetoric that conflates legitimate political activism with support for extremist groups. This dangerous fusion serves to stifle debate on complex international issues and creates a chilling effect on campuses across the nation.
The targeting of foreign-born students and activists based on their political views represents a significant shift in immigration policy, one that weaponizes ICE as a tool for suppressing dissent. This approach not only undermines America’s reputation as a beacon of free speech but also threatens to deter international students from choosing U.S. universities, potentially damaging the country’s position as a global leader in higher education.
The administration has made clear that Columbia is merely the first target, with nine other major institutions in the crosshairs, including Harvard University, George Washington University, Johns Hopkins University, New York University, Northwestern University, UCLA, UC Berkeley, the University of Minnesota, and USC.
Moreover, the administration’s decision to withhold federal funding from universities that allow what Trump deems illegal protests is an attempt to strong-arm academic institutions into policing student activism. This not only infringes on the autonomy of universities but also contradicts the principles of open inquiry and debate that are essential to the academic mission.
Behind the scenes, the machinery of surveillance has been fully activated. Officials from a specialized ICE division normally focused on human trafficking and drug smuggling have been repurposed to monitor social media content, searching for evidence that could be interpreted as support for Hamas. These investigators then submit reports to the State Department, which has invoked obscure legal provisions to justify actions against targeted individuals.
Legal Challenges and Free Speech
The legal foundation for Khalil’s detention rests on shaky ground. Only an immigration judge has the authority to revoke a green card, according to legal experts. Recognizing this overreach, a federal judge has already blocked Khalil’s removal from the United States while weighing a habeas corpus petition challenging his arrest.
In court filings, Khalil’s attorneys argue that his detention represents an “open repression of student activism and political speech, specifically targeting students at Columbia University for criticism of Israel’s assault on Gaza”. The petition further states that,
The US government has made clear that they will use immigration enforcement as a tool to suppress that speech.
Civil liberties organizations have been quick to recognize the constitutional implications. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) noted in a letter to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem that the government has not made clear the factual or legal basis for Mr. Khalil’s arrest. The statements the government has released suggest its decision may be based on his constitutionally protected speech.
Donna Lieberman, CEO of the New York Civil Liberties Union, was more blunt, stating that Khalil’s arrest “reeks of McCarthyism” and that the federal government had “no authority” to strip his permanent residence status over political speech. During the McCarthy era, political dissent was similarly criminalized, and those with “un-American” views faced persecution.
Today’s targeting of pro-Palestinian activists follows a similar pattern. The labeling of student protesters as sympathizers of terrorism serves to delegitimize protected political expression and creates a false dichotomy between security and freedom.
Perhaps most troubling is how quickly universities have acquiesced to the administration’s demands. Columbia University, despite its historical commitment to academic freedom, permitted ICE agents to enter university property to detain Khalil. This stands in contrast to other civic leaders who have established clear boundaries regarding ICE operations in their jurisdictions.
Even before Khalil’s arrest, Columbia had already implemented severe measures against campus activism. The university banned chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine and Jewish Voices for Peace following the October 7 attacks. When protests escalated last spring, Columbia invited the New York Police Department onto campus to dismantle encampments and arrest students. This academic year, the university established a special disciplinary committee that has initiated investigations into numerous students, some for offenses as minor as writing opinion pieces advocating for divestment.
Just days after his arrest, Columbia announced a new round of punishments for students involved in last year’s protests, including multi-year suspensions, degree revocations, and outright expulsions. Interim president Katrina Armstrong has publicly stated that addressing antisemitism is the university’s “number one priority,” a clear signal to the administration and powerful alumni that the institution is willing to impose harsh discipline on dissenting voices.
Academic Freedom
For international students and scholars across America, the message couldn’t be clearer: your visa or green card is contingent on political conformity. The Trump administration’s previous term saw restrictive immigration policies affecting student visas and work opportunities, with H-1B denial rates reaching 24% in fiscal year 2018. These policies have already begun reshaping global educational flows, with East Asian student interest in US institutions declining as countries like the UK and Australia become more attractive options.
When viewed in the larger scope of the Trump administration’s stance on immigration and America First, this might be exactly what they are trying to achieve. Every foreign student from Pakistan or India is taking a spot away from an American. Trump has slashed DEI quotas from Federal institutions and is pressuring the private sector to follow suit. The education system, where DEI philosophy originated, is likely a target as well, but what will that do to academic freedom and the non-political pursuit of a liberal education?
Faculty members at Columbia have sounded the alarm about the existential threat this poses to higher education.
Universities cannot exist when students are persecuted, arrested and disappeared for their political beliefs,
warned Nara Milanich, a professor at Columbia’s Barnard College. Jameel Jaffer, executive director of the Knight First Amendment Center at Columbia, described the arrest as “the kind of action one ordinarily associates with the world’s most repressive regimes.”
Khalil’s arrest has sparked protests across New York City, including a demonstration at Trump Tower that resulted in nearly 100 arrests. Many participants wore shirts bearing slogans such as “Not in Our Name” and “Jews Say Stop Arming Israel.”
The irony of Trump’s assault on campus free speech is its timing—coming just weeks after he signed an Executive Order titled “Restoring Freedom of Speech and Ending Federal Censorship”. This juxtaposition exposes a fundamental truth about authoritarian tendencies. The loudest proclamations of defending freedom often mask the most serious threats to liberty.
Tom Homan, who oversees Trump’s deportation initiatives, revealed the administration’s perspective when he told New York legislators,
Freedom of speech has limitations. We consider him a national security threat.
This statement represents a fundamental misunderstanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of First Amendment protections, which specifically exist to prevent the government from targeting political speech it finds objectionable.
Currently, Americans face a crucial choice about the kind of society they wish to be. Will they permit the tools of immigration enforcement to be weaponized against political dissent? Will they allow financial coercion to transform independent universities into enforcers of government-approved thought? Or will they recognize that the strength of our democracy lies precisely in protecting the rights of those whose views challenge the status quo?
The case of Mahmoud Khalil is not just about one man’s fate, it is a test of whether America remains committed to its founding principles in an age of increasing polarization. The Trump administration’s willingness to target a legal permanent resident for deportation based on protected political expression sets a dangerous precedent that threatens not just campus activism but the very foundations of democratic discourse.
