🔗 Share this article

When government officers arrested Columbia University student a student activist in his university residence, Jameel Jaffer understood a significant fight lay ahead.

Jaffer heads a university-connected institute focused on protecting First Amendment rights. The student, a green card holder, had been active in Palestinian solidarity encampments on campus. Previously, the institute had organized a symposium about constitutional protections for immigrants.

"We recognized a direct link to the case, since we're at Columbia," Jaffer stated. "We viewed this arrest as a serious infringement of constitutional freedoms."

Major Legal Win Against Government

Recently, the institute's lawyers at the free speech organization, along with legal partners their co-counsel, secured a landmark victory when a district court judge in Boston determined that the detention and attempted deportation of the student and additional activists was unconstitutional and intentionally designed to suppress protest.

The Trump administration announced they'll challenge the verdict, with administration representative Liz Huston describing the ruling an "unacceptable decision that hampers the safety and security of our nation".

Increasing Separation Separating Organization and University

The ruling raised the profile of the Knight Institute, propelling it to the forefront of the battle against the administration over core constitutional principles. However the victory also underscored the growing divide between the institute and the institution that houses it.

The case – described by the judge as "perhaps the most important to ever fall within the authority of this district court" – was the initial of several opposing Trump's unprecedented assault on universities to go to trial.

Court Testimony

Throughout the two-week trial, academic experts testified about the climate of terror and self-censorship ushered in by the arrests, while government agents revealed details about their reliance on reports by rightwing, pro-Israel organizations to pick their targets.

Veena Dubal, chief lawyer of the American Association of University Professors, which filed the lawsuit together with some of its chapters and the Middle East Studies Association, called it "the central constitutional lawsuit of the Trump administration this time around".

'Institution and Organization Are On Opposing Positions'

Although the court victory was praised by supporters and academics across the country, Jaffer received no communication from Columbia after the ruling – a reflection of the tensions in the positions staked out by the institute and the university.

Even before Trump took office, the university had represented the shrinking space for pro-Palestinian speech on US campuses after it called police to remove its student encampment, disciplined dozens of students for their activism and severely limited demonstrations on campus.

University Settlement

This summer, the university negotiated an agreement with the federal government to pay millions to settle antisemitism claims and submit to significant limitations on its autonomy in a move widely condemned as "surrender" to the administration's bullying tactics.

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

"We're at a time in which the university and the organization are on different sides of some of these critical questions," noted Joel Simon at the free speech center.

Institute's Mission

This organization was established in 2016 and is located on the Columbia campus. It has received substantial support from the institution as part of an agreement that had each contributing substantial amounts in program support and endowment funds to launch it.

"My hope for the institute in the years ahead is that when there is that moment when the administration has overstepped boundaries and fundamental rights are threatened and no one else is prepared to take action and to declare, enough is enough, it will be the this organization who will have stepped forward," stated Lee Bollinger, a First Amendment scholar who established the center.

Open Disagreement

Following campus developments, the university and the Knight Institute were positioned on opposing sides, with the institute regularly criticizing the institution's management of campus demonstrations both privately and in progressively critical public statements.

In one letter to university leadership, the director criticized the decision to penalize two student groups, which the institution said had violated policies concerning organizing protests.

Escalating Tensions

Subsequently, the director again condemned the university's decision to call police onto campus to remove a peaceful, student protest – leading to the arrest of more than 100 students.

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

Student Perspective

The detained student, specifically, had appealed to campus officials for protection, and in a published article composed while jailed he stated that "the logic used by the federal government to single out me and fellow students is an outgrowth of the university's suppression approach regarding Palestine".

The university reached agreement with the federal government shortly after the trial concluded in court.

Institute's Response

Following the deal was announced, the organization published a scathing rebuke, concluding that the agreement sanctions "an astonishing transfer of independence and authority to the administration".

"University administration should not have accepted these terms," the declaration stated.

Wider Impact

Knight has allies – organizations such as the ACLU, the free speech organization and other rights organizations have opposed the government over constitutional matters, as have unions and Harvard University.

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 climate activists challenging government agencies over environmental information and challenged the withholding of official reports.

Special Situation

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

Jaffer showed understanding for the absence of "favorable choices" for Columbia's leaders while he described their agreement as a "serious mistake". But he stressed that although the institute standing at the other side of its parent institution when it comes to dealing with the president, the institution has allowed it to function without interference.

"Particularly currently, I don't take this independence as automatic," he stated. "If Columbia tried to limit our activities, I wouldn't remain at Columbia any more."