🔗 Share this article

After federal agents detained the university student a student activist in his campus housing, the institute director understood a major battle was coming.

The director leads a university-connected center focused on defending free speech protections. Khalil, a permanent resident, had been involved in pro-Palestinian protests on campus. Previously, the institute had organized a conference about free speech rights for immigrants.

"We recognized a direct link with this situation, because we're at Columbia," Jaffer stated. "And we saw this detention as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Landmark Victory Against Administration

Last week, the institute's lawyers at the Knight First Amendment Institute, along with the law firm their co-counsel, secured a landmark victory when a federal judge in Massachusetts determined that the detention and planned removal of Khalil and additional activists was illegal and intentionally designed to chill free speech.

Government officials has said it will appeal the verdict, with administration representative a spokeswoman calling the ruling an "outrageous ruling that hampers the protection of the country".

Growing Divide Between Organization and Institution

This decision elevated the visibility of the Knight Institute, catapulting it to the frontlines of the battle against the administration over fundamental American values. However the victory also underscored the widening chasm between the organization and the institution that hosts it.

This legal challenge – characterized by the presiding official as "perhaps the most important to ever fall within the jurisdiction of this court" – was the initial of several challenging Trump's unusual attack on higher education to reach court proceedings.

Court Testimony

During the court proceedings, academic experts testified about the climate of terror and silencing caused by the arrests, while immigration officials disclosed details about their dependence on dossiers by conservative, Israel-supporting organizations to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which brought the case together with some of its chapters and the Middle East Studies Association, called it "the central constitutional case of the current government currently".

'Institution and Institute Are On Opposing Positions'

While the court victory was hailed by supporters and scholars 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 institution.

Prior to the administration began, Columbia had represented the declining tolerance for Palestinian advocacy on US campuses after it summoned officers to clear its student encampment, suspended multiple activists for their activism and severely limited demonstrations on campus.

University Settlement

This summer, the institution negotiated an agreement with the federal government to provide substantial funds to resolve discrimination allegations and accept major restrictions on its autonomy in a move broadly criticized as "surrender" to the administration's bullying tactics.

The university's submissive approach was starkly at odds with the organization's principled position.

"This is a moment in which the university and the organization hold opposing views of these fundamental issues," observed a former fellow at the free speech center.

Organization's Purpose

This organization was launched in 2016 and is housed on the Columbia campus. It has received substantial support from the institution as part of an arrangement that had both providing substantial amounts in program support and long-term financing to establish the center.

"My hope for the institute in the long-term future is that when there is that moment when the government has overstepped boundaries and fundamental rights are at stake and few others are willing to step forward and to declare, enough is enough, that's when the Knight Institute who will have taken action," stated the former president, a constitutional expert who helped create the center.

Open Disagreement

Following campus developments, the university and the Knight Institute found themselves on opposing sides, with Knight regularly criticizing the institution's management of campus demonstrations both in private communications and in progressively critical official comments.

In one letter to university leadership, the director condemned the decision to suspend campus organizations, which the institution said had violated policies concerning organizing protests.

Growing Conflict

Subsequently, Jaffer again condemned the institution's choice to summon law enforcement onto campus to remove a non-violent, student protest – resulting in the arrest of more than 100 students.

"Institutional policies are separated from the values that are central to the academic community and purpose – including expression, academic freedom, and equality," he wrote in that instance.

Activist Viewpoint

Khalil, specifically, had pleaded with university administrators for support, and in a published article composed while jailed he stated that "the reasoning employed by the administration to target me and fellow students is an outgrowth of the university's suppression approach regarding Palestinian issues".

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

Institute's Response

Shortly after the agreement was announced, the Knight Institute published a strong criticism, stating that the settlement sanctions "a remarkable shift of independence and control to the administration".

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

Wider Impact

Knight doesn't stand alone – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the free speech organization and additional rights organizations have challenged the government over constitutional matters, as have unions and other institutions.

Nor is it exclusively focusing on university matters – in other challenges to the Trump administration, the organization has filed cases on behalf of farmers and climate activists opposing federal departments over climate-related information and fought the withholding of official reports.

Unique Position

However its protection of campus expression at a university now synonymous with compromising on it puts it in a particularly difficult position.

Jaffer expressed sympathy for the absence of "good options" for Columbia's leaders while he characterized their agreement as a "serious mistake". But he emphasized that although the organization standing at the other side of its host when it comes to dealing with the administration, the university has allowed it to function without interference.

"Especially right now, I appreciate that freedom as automatic," he said. "If Columbia tried to restrict our work, I wouldn't remain at Columbia any more."