🔗 Share this article

After government officers detained Columbia University student a student activist in his university residence, the institute director understood a significant fight was coming.

Jaffer heads a Columbia-affiliated center focused on defending First Amendment rights. Khalil, a green card holder, had been involved in pro-Palestinian encampments on campus. Previously, the institute had hosted a conference about free speech rights for noncitizens.

"We felt a direct link with this situation, since we're part of the university," Jaffer explained. "And we saw this arrest as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Major Legal Win Against Government

Recently, the institute's lawyers at the free speech organization, along with legal partners Sher Tremonte, secured a significant legal win when a district court judge in Boston determined that the detention and planned removal of the student and additional activists was illegal and intentionally designed to chill free speech.

The Trump administration has said they'll challenge the verdict, with administration representative a spokeswoman describing the judgment an "outrageous ruling that undermines the protection of our nation".

Growing Divide Between Organization and University

The ruling raised the visibility of the Knight Institute, catapulting it to the frontlines of the conflict with Trump over core constitutional principles. However the win also underscored the growing divide between the organization and the institution that houses it.

This legal challenge – described by the judge as "perhaps the most important ever fall within the authority of this district court" – was the initial of multiple challenging Trump's unprecedented assault on higher education to reach court proceedings.

Court Testimony

Throughout the two-week trial, citizen and noncitizen scholars gave evidence about the climate of terror and silencing caused by the arrests, while immigration officials disclosed information about their dependence on reports by rightwing, Israel-supporting organizations to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, general counsel 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 civil rights lawsuit of the current government currently".

'Institution and Organization Are On Opposing Positions'

While the legal success was praised by supporters and academics across the country, Jaffer heard nothing from Columbia following the decision – a reflection of the disagreements in the stances staked out by the organization and the institution.

Prior to the administration began, Columbia had come to symbolize the shrinking space for Palestinian advocacy on American universities after it summoned officers to clear its campus protest, suspended multiple activists for their protests and severely limited demonstrations on campus.

Institutional Agreement

This summer, the university negotiated an agreement with the federal government to pay millions to settle discrimination allegations and accept significant limitations on its autonomy in a move widely condemned as "surrender" to the president's pressure strategies.

Columbia's compliant stance was starkly at odds with the organization's defiant one.

"We're at a time in which the institution and the institute are on different sides of these fundamental issues," observed a former fellow at the free speech center.

Institute's Mission

This organization was established in 2016 and is housed on the Columbia campus. It has obtained significant funding from the university as part of an agreement that had each contributing millions in program support and endowment funds to establish the center.

"My hope for the organization in the long-term future is that when there is that moment when the government has gone in the wrong direction and fundamental rights are at stake and no one else is prepared to step forward and to declare, this must stop, it will be the Knight Institute that will taken action," stated the former president, a First Amendment scholar who helped create the center.

Open Disagreement

Shortly after campus developments, the university and the Knight Institute found themselves on opposing sides, with the institute regularly criticizing the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both privately and in increasingly unforgiving official comments.

In correspondence to campus administration, the director criticized the decision to suspend campus organizations, which the institution said had violated policies related to holding campus events.

Growing Conflict

Later, Jaffer again condemned the university's decision to call law enforcement onto campus to clear a peaceful, pro-Palestinian encampment – leading to the arrest of numerous activists.

"Institutional policies have become disconnected from the values that are essential for the university's life and mission – including expression, scholarly independence, and equality," he wrote in that instance.

Student Perspective

Khalil, specifically, had pleaded with campus officials for support, and in an op-ed written from detention he wrote that "the reasoning employed by the federal government to single out me and fellow students is a direct extension of Columbia's repression approach concerning Palestine".

The university settled with the federal government shortly after the case wrapped in court.

Organization's Reaction

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

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

Broader Context

The institute has allies – organizations such as the ACLU, the Foundation for Individual Rights and other rights organizations have challenged the Trump administration over free speech issues, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

Nor is it exclusively focusing on university matters – in additional lawsuits to the government, the institute has filed cases on behalf of farmers and climate activists opposing federal departments over climate-related datasets and challenged the withholding of official reports.

Special Situation

However its defense of student speech at a university now associated with making concessions on it places it in a particularly difficult situation.

The director expressed sympathy for the absence of "favorable choices" for Columbia's leaders even as he described their decision to settle as a "major error". But he emphasized that although the institute standing at the other side of its parent institution when it comes to addressing the administration, the institution has permitted it to function free of pressure.

"Especially right now, I appreciate that freedom for granted," he stated. "Should the university attempt to restrict our work, I wouldn't be at Columbia any longer."