As the Court fights for the revocation of the Trump administration of visas of foreign students, a federal judge in Boston is considering the question of whether those in the United States that are not citizens are protected by the same constitutional right to freedom of expression as US citizens.
During a judicial hearing in Massachusetts that is preparing for a trial in a lawsuit that defies the revocation of Trump administration student, Judge William Young suggested that “it is not clear” for him that non -citizens have the “complete rights to freedom of expression” that citizens have, since the Trump administration tries to use the speech of some international students to justify their deposits.
“I find that this is assumed by several of my colleagues in related cases that deal with freedom of expression in the lower courts, but I am not clear that non -citizens call them, the complete rights to the freedom of expression that a citizen has,” said the drained judge.
“I hope we will not arrive in this case, but I do not see how that will work if a non -citizen has the same rights as a citizen to talk about these matters,” said the judge, suggesting that the question should be answered by the Supreme Court.
People meet for a manifestation in support of the student of the University of Tufts, Rumeysa Ozturb, and the student activist of the University of Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi, in Foley Square on May 6, 2025 in New York City.
Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images
In March, the American Association of University Professors, the Association of Studies of the Middle East and other organizations that represent academics and students of the universities, including Harvard University, demanded the Trump administration, claiming that the recent government efforts to revoke visas and stop and deport Pro-Palestinian activists have “created a climate of repression and fear in university campuses.”
The groups have accused the Trump administration of “terrifying students and the faculty for their exercise of the rights of the first amendment”, while the government has tried to disarm the case, dismissing the claim that the Trump administration is enforcing a policy of “ideological deportations.”
The case is expected to proceed to a trial in July.
During Tuesday’s hearing, Young emphasized that this is “truly a case of freedom of expression”, explaining that both high -ranking officials, including the president, and his critics are protected under freedom of expression, regardless of how “brutal, rude and degrading” could be the speech.
He also specified that he considers the defense and pro-palestinian criticisms of the state of Israel, as well as anti-Semitism, freedom of expression because hate discourse is not prohibited under the first amendment.
What the court aims to determine through the trial, said the judge, is whether the federal government committed some “compensation” against people for their speech with a chilling effect, which the plaintiffs affirm and the government denies.
“We are going to have to find out what happened: what do the plaintiffs say that it is a real remuneration against the speakers?” Young said.
Mohsen Mahdawi speaks out of the court after a judge released the Palestinian student activist, on April 30, 2025 in Burlington, vt.
Amanda Swinhart/AP
The judge added that he is also looking for detailed explanations from the government about his process of revocation, detention and deportation of visas.
“When we reached the level of ice application agents … I want to know what was happening. Why were they armed or masked or not or not identified, all that. What was happening and why? Who established that? Who established this business with the Mahdawi in Vermont? Said the judge, referring to the case of the student of the Palestine University of Columbia, Mohsen Mahdawi, who was arrested in one. citizenship interview and was recently released.
