🔗 Share this article

When government officers arrested Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil in his university residence, Jameel Jaffer knew a major battle was coming.

Jaffer heads a Columbia-affiliated institute dedicated to protecting free speech protections. Khalil, a green card holder, had been involved in Palestinian solidarity protests on campus. Months earlier, Jaffer's organization had hosted a conference about free speech rights for noncitizens.

"We recognized this connection to the case, because we're part of the university," Jaffer stated. "And we saw this detention as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Major Legal Win Challenging Government

Recently, Jaffer's team at the Knight First Amendment Institute, along with legal partners Sher Tremonte, secured a significant legal win when a district court judge in Massachusetts determined that the detention and attempted deportation of Khalil and additional activists was unconstitutional and intentionally designed to chill free speech.

The Trump administration has said it will appeal the decision, with White House spokesperson Liz Huston calling the judgment an "outrageous ruling that undermines the protection of our nation".

Growing Divide Separating Organization and University

This decision raised the profile of the Knight Institute, propelling it to the frontlines of the conflict against Trump over core constitutional principles. Yet the win also highlighted the growing divide between the organization and the university that hosts it.

The case – characterized by the judge as "perhaps the significant ever come under the jurisdiction of this district court" – was the initial of multiple challenging the administration's unusual attack on higher education to reach court proceedings.

Trial Revelations

During the court proceedings, academic experts gave evidence about the atmosphere of fear and silencing ushered in by the detentions, while government agents disclosed information about their dependence on dossiers by rightwing, pro-Israel groups to select individuals.

A legal expert, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which brought the case along with some of its chapters and the academic group, described it "the primary civil rights lawsuit of the Trump administration this time around".

'University and Institute Are On Different Sides'

Although the legal success was hailed by advocates and academics nationwide, the director received no communication from university leadership after the ruling – an indication of the disagreements in the stances taken by the organization and the university.

Even before the administration began, Columbia had come to symbolize the shrinking space for Palestinian advocacy on US campuses after it summoned officers to clear its campus protest, suspended dozens of students for their protests and severely limited demonstrations on campus.

Institutional Agreement

This summer, the institution negotiated an agreement with the federal government to pay millions to resolve discrimination allegations and submit to significant limitations on its autonomy in a move broadly criticized as "surrender" to the administration's pressure strategies.

The university's compliant stance was sharply contrasted with the Knight Institute's defiant one.

"This is a moment in which the institution and the organization are on different sides of these critical questions," observed a former fellow at the free speech center.

Organization's Purpose

The Knight Institute was established in 2016 and is housed on the Columbia campus. It has received significant funding from the university as part of an agreement that had each contributing substantial amounts in program support and long-term financing to launch it.

"My hope 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 threatened and few others is prepared to take action and to say, enough is enough, it will be the Knight Institute who will have taken action," stated the former president, a constitutional expert who established the center.

Open Disagreement

Shortly after campus developments, the university and the Knight Institute found themselves on different sides, with Knight regularly criticizing the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both in private communications and in progressively critical public statements.

In correspondence to campus administration, the director criticized the action to penalize two student groups, which the institution said had broken rules concerning holding campus events.

Escalating Tensions

Subsequently, Jaffer again condemned the university's decision to summon police onto campus to clear a peaceful, student protest – resulting in the detention of numerous activists.

"The university's decisions are separated from the principles that are central to the academic community and mission – including free speech, academic freedom, and fair treatment," he stated this time.

Activist Viewpoint

Khalil, specifically, had pleaded with campus officials for support, and in an op-ed composed while jailed he stated that "the logic used by the federal government to single out me and fellow students is a direct extension of the university's suppression approach concerning Palestinian issues".

The university reached agreement with the Trump administration shortly after the trial concluded in court.

Organization's Reaction

Following the deal was revealed, the Knight Institute published a strong criticism, stating that the settlement sanctions "an astonishing transfer of independence and control to the government".

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

Broader Context

The institute doesn't stand alone – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the Foundation for Individual Rights and additional civil liberties groups have challenged the government over constitutional matters, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

Nor is it concentrating solely on university matters – in other challenges to the government, the institute has sued on behalf of agricultural workers and environmental advocates opposing government agencies over climate-related information and challenged the withholding of government documents.

Special Situation

However its defense of campus expression at a institution now synonymous with compromising on it places it in a particularly difficult situation.

The director showed understanding for the lack of "good options" for Columbia's leaders while he described their decision to settle as a "major error". But he emphasized that despite the organization positioned at the opposite end of its parent institution when it comes to dealing with the president, the institution has permitted it to operate without interference.

"Particularly currently, I appreciate that freedom as automatic," he said. "If Columbia tried to restrict our work, I wouldn't be at the university any longer."