🔗 Share this article

After government officers detained Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil in his university residence, the institute director understood a major battle was coming.

Jaffer heads a university-connected institute focused on defending free speech rights. Khalil, a permanent resident, had been involved in pro-Palestinian encampments on campus. Previously, the institute had organized a conference about free speech rights for noncitizens.

"We recognized a direct link with this situation, because we're at Columbia," Jaffer stated. "We viewed this arrest as a major violation of First Amendment rights."

Major Legal Win Against Government

Last week, the institute's lawyers at the free speech organization, along with legal partners Sher Tremonte, secured a landmark victory when a district court judge in Boston determined that the detention and planned removal of the student and other pro-Palestinian students was illegal and intentionally designed to suppress protest.

Government officials announced they'll challenge the verdict, with White House spokesperson a spokeswoman describing the ruling an "outrageous ruling that undermines the protection of the country".

Growing Divide Between Organization and University

This decision elevated the visibility of the free speech center, propelling it to the forefront of the battle with the administration over core constitutional principles. However the win also underscored the growing divide between the institute and the institution that hosts it.

The case – described by the presiding official as "perhaps the significant ever fall within the authority of this court" – was the first of multiple challenging Trump's unprecedented assault on universities to reach court proceedings.

Court Testimony

During the two-week trial, citizen and noncitizen scholars testified about the climate of terror and silencing caused by the detentions, while government agents revealed information about their reliance on reports by rightwing, Israel-supporting groups to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which brought the case along with local branches and the academic group, called it "the central civil rights case of the Trump administration this time around".

'Institution and Organization Are On Different Sides'

While the court victory was hailed by supporters and academics across the country, Jaffer heard nothing from Columbia following the decision – a reflection of the tensions in the stances taken by the organization and the university.

Prior to the administration began, Columbia had represented the shrinking space for pro-Palestinian speech on US campuses after it called police to clear its campus protest, disciplined multiple activists for their protests and dramatically restricted demonstrations on campus.

Institutional Agreement

Recently, the institution reached a deal with the Trump administration to pay millions to settle antisemitism claims and submit to major restrictions on its autonomy in a action widely condemned as "surrender" to the president's pressure strategies.

The university's submissive approach was starkly at odds with the organization's principled position.

"This is a moment in which the institution and the institute are on different sides of these fundamental issues," noted a former fellow at the free speech center.

Institute's Mission

This organization was established in recent years and is located on the Columbia campus. It has obtained significant funding from the university as part of an arrangement that had each contributing substantial amounts in operating funds and endowment funds to launch it.

"Our vision for the organization in the years ahead is that when there is that moment when the government has overstepped boundaries and fundamental rights are threatened and no one else is prepared to step forward and to say, enough is enough, it will be the this organization that will taken action," stated Lee Bollinger, a constitutional expert who established the center.

Open Disagreement

Shortly after campus developments, Columbia and the Knight Institute were positioned on opposing sides, with Knight frequently objecting to the university's handling of campus demonstrations both privately and in increasingly unforgiving public statements.

In correspondence to campus administration, Jaffer condemned the action to penalize two student groups, which the university said had broken rules concerning organizing protests.

Growing Conflict

Later, the director again condemned the institution's choice to call police onto campus to remove a peaceful, student protest – resulting in the arrest of numerous activists.

"Institutional policies are disconnected from the principles that are essential for the academic community and mission – such as expression, academic freedom, and fair treatment," he stated in that instance.

Activist Viewpoint

Khalil, specifically, had appealed to campus officials for support, and in an op-ed composed while jailed he wrote that "the logic employed by the federal government to target myself and my peers is a direct extension of the university's suppression playbook regarding Palestine".

Columbia settled with the Trump administration just days after the trial concluded in court.

Institute's Response

Following the agreement was revealed, the organization published a scathing rebuke, concluding that the settlement approves "a remarkable shift of autonomy and control to the administration".

"Columbia's leaders should not have accepted this," the declaration stated.

Wider Impact

The institute doesn't stand alone – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the Foundation for Individual Rights and additional rights organizations have opposed the Trump administration over free speech issues, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

The institute isn't concentrating solely on campus issues – in other challenges to the Trump administration, the organization has sued on behalf of farmers and climate activists opposing federal departments over environmental datasets and fought the suppression of government documents.

Special Situation

However its protection of campus expression at a institution now synonymous with making concessions on it places it in a particularly difficult situation.

Jaffer showed understanding for the lack of "favorable choices" for university administration while he described their agreement as a "serious mistake". But he stressed that despite the organization standing at the other side of its host when it comes to addressing the administration, the university has permitted it to operate free of pressure.

"Particularly currently, I appreciate this independence for granted," he stated. "If Columbia tried to restrict our work, I wouldn't be at the university any more."