🔗 Share this article

When government officers detained the university student a student activist in his university residence, the institute director understood a significant fight lay ahead.

The director heads a university-connected center dedicated to protecting free speech rights. Khalil, a green card holder, had been active in pro-Palestinian encampments on campus. Previously, the institute had hosted a conference about constitutional protections for noncitizens.

"We felt a direct link with this situation, because we're part of the university," Jaffer stated. "We viewed this detention as a serious infringement of constitutional freedoms."

Landmark Victory Against Government

Last week, Jaffer's team at the free speech organization, together with legal partners their co-counsel, achieved a significant legal win when a district court judge in Massachusetts ruled that the arrest and attempted deportation of the student and other pro-Palestinian students was unconstitutional and purposely created to suppress protest.

The Trump administration has said it will appeal the decision, with White House spokesperson a spokeswoman describing the judgment an "outrageous ruling that undermines the protection of the country".

Growing Divide Separating Institute and Institution

This decision raised the visibility of the Knight Institute, propelling it to the forefront of the battle against the administration over fundamental American values. Yet the victory also highlighted the widening chasm between the institute and the institution that hosts it.

The case – described by the presiding official as "perhaps the most important to ever fall within the jurisdiction of this court" – was the initial of multiple challenging Trump's unprecedented assault on universities to go to trial.

Trial Revelations

Throughout the two-week trial, academic experts gave evidence about the climate of terror and silencing caused by the arrests, while government agents revealed details about their reliance on dossiers by rightwing, Israel-supporting organizations to pick their targets.

A legal expert, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which filed the lawsuit along with local branches and the Middle East Studies Association, described it "the central constitutional lawsuit of the current government this time around".

'University and Institute Occupy Different Sides'

Although the legal success was hailed by advocates and academics across the country, Jaffer heard nothing from university leadership following the ruling – an indication of the tensions in the positions staked out by the organization and the university.

Prior to Trump took office, the university had come to symbolize the declining tolerance for Palestinian advocacy on American universities after it called police to clear its student encampment, disciplined dozens of students for their activism and dramatically restricted demonstrations on campus.

University Settlement

This summer, the university reached a deal with the Trump administration to provide substantial funds to settle discrimination allegations and accept significant limitations on its autonomy in a move broadly criticized as "capitulation" to the president's pressure strategies.

The university's compliant stance was starkly at odds with the organization's principled position.

"This is a time in which the institution and the institute hold opposing views of these critical questions," observed a former fellow at the Knight Institute.

Organization's Purpose

The Knight Institute was launched in recent years and is located on the university grounds. It has obtained substantial support from the institution as part of an arrangement that had both providing millions in program support and long-term financing to launch it.

"Our vision for the institute in the long-term future is that when there is a time when the administration has overstepped boundaries and fundamental rights are at stake and few others is prepared to take action and to say, enough is enough, that's when the Knight Institute that will taken action," said Lee Bollinger, a First Amendment scholar who established the institute.

Public Criticism

Shortly after recent events, Columbia and the the organization were positioned on different sides, with Knight frequently objecting to the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both privately and in increasingly unforgiving official comments.

In correspondence to campus administration, the director condemned the decision to suspend two student groups, which the university said had violated policies related to organizing protests.

Growing Conflict

Subsequently, Jaffer further criticized the institution's choice to call law enforcement onto campus to clear a peaceful, pro-Palestinian encampment – resulting in the arrest of numerous activists.

"The university's decisions are disconnected from the principles that are essential for the university's life and mission – such as free speech, scholarly independence, and fair treatment," he stated this time.

Student Perspective

Khalil, in particular, had appealed to campus officials for protection, and in a published article written from detention he wrote that "the reasoning employed by the federal government to target me and my peers is an outgrowth of the university's suppression playbook regarding Palestine".

The university reached agreement with the Trump administration shortly after the case wrapped in court.

Institute's Response

Following the deal was announced, the organization published a strong criticism, concluding that the settlement sanctions "an astonishing transfer of independence and authority to the government".

"Columbia's leaders should not have agreed to these terms," the declaration said.

Wider Impact

The institute has allies – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the Foundation for Individual Rights and additional rights organizations have opposed the government over constitutional matters, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

The institute isn't exclusively focusing on university matters – in other challenges to the government, the institute has sued on behalf of farmers and environmental advocates opposing federal departments over climate-related information and challenged the suppression of government documents.

Unique Position

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

The director expressed sympathy for the lack of "good options" for Columbia's leaders even as he characterized their decision to settle as a "serious mistake". But he emphasized that despite the organization standing at the opposite end of its host when it comes to dealing with the president, the university has permitted it to function free of pressure.

"Especially right now, I don't take that freedom for granted," he said. "Should the university attempt to limit our activities, I wouldn't be at Columbia any longer."