Judge fears ‘Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values’
In a ruling he issued today, William G Young, a federal judge in Massachusetts, wrote:
“Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.”
President Ronald Reagan, Inaugural Address as Governor of the State of California (January 5, 1967).I first heard these words of President Reagan’s back in 2007 when my son quoted them in the Law Day celebration speech at the Norfolk Superior Court. I was deeply moved and hold these words before me as a I discharge judicial duties. As I’ve read and re-read the record in this case, listened widely, and reflected extensively, I’ve come to believe that President Trump truly understands and appreciates the full import of President Reagan’s inspiring message –- yet I fear he has drawn from it a darker, more cynical message. I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected.
Is he correct?
A federal judge has ruled that the Trump administration’s policy to detain and deport foreign scholars over their pro-Palestinian views violates the US constitution and was designed to “intentionally” chill free speech rights.
The case was brought by the national American Association of University Professors (AAUP); its Harvard, Rutgers and New York University chapters; and the Middle East Studies Association (Mesa), following the arrest and detention of several non-citizen students and scholars who have spoken out for Palestinian rights.
In a 161-page ruling issued on Tuesday, the judge, William G Young, a Ronald Reagan appointee, called the case “perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court”.
“This case … squarely presents the issue whether non-citizens lawfully present here in United States actually have the same free speech rights as the rest of us,” Young wrote in the ruling. “The Court answers this Constitutional question unequivocally ‘yes, they do’.
“‘No law’ means ‘no law’,” Young continued – a reference to the first amendment’s stipulation that Congress “shall make no law” abridging the freedom of speech. “No one’s freedom of speech is unlimited, of course, but these limits are the same for both citizens and non-citizens alike.”
The plaintiffs had accused the government of running an illegal “ideological-deportation policy” after Trump signed two executive orders in January targeting non-citizens who “espouse hateful ideology” and to combat antisemitism.
The government denied such a policy existed, declaring in court filings that it was the product of plaintiffs’ “imagination” and that officials had made determinations about each individual on a case-by-case basis. It also claimed the authority to deport non-citizens who have committed no crimes but whose presence it deems poses a threat to US foreign policy.
During the trial, the government’s attorneys sought to block the release of documents detailing its processes and reasons for revoking student visas and issuing determinations of removability for green card holders. Several state department officials testified in court that they had been instructed by higher-ups to compile allegations about the individuals targeted, sometimes relying on dossiers from the rightwing Canary Mission, a secretive, pro-Israel group dedicated to doxing thousands of pro-Palestinian scholars. [Continue reading…]