🔗 Share this article

When government officers arrested Columbia University student a student activist in his university residence, the institute director understood a major battle was coming.

Jaffer heads a Columbia-affiliated institute focused on protecting First Amendment rights. The student, a permanent resident, had been involved in pro-Palestinian protests on campus. Previously, Jaffer's organization had organized a symposium about constitutional protections for immigrants.

"We felt this connection to the case, since we're part of the university," Jaffer explained. "And we saw this detention as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Major Legal Win Against Government

Recently, the institute's lawyers at the Knight First Amendment Institute, along with the law firm their co-counsel, achieved a landmark victory when a district court judge in Massachusetts ruled that the detention and attempted deportation of the student and other pro-Palestinian students was unconstitutional and intentionally designed to suppress protest.

The Trump administration announced they'll challenge the decision, with White House spokesperson Liz Huston calling the judgment an "unacceptable decision that hampers the safety and security of our nation".

Increasing Separation Between Institute and University

This decision elevated the profile of the free speech center, catapulting it to the frontlines of the battle with Trump over core constitutional principles. However the win also highlighted the growing divide between the institute and the university that hosts it.

The case – characterized by the judge as "perhaps the most important to ever come under the jurisdiction of this court" – was the first of several challenging the administration's unusual attack on higher education to reach court proceedings.

Trial Revelations

During the court proceedings, academic experts gave evidence about the atmosphere of fear and silencing caused by the detentions, while government agents revealed details about their reliance on dossiers by rightwing, Israel-supporting organizations to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, chief lawyer of the American Association of University Professors, which brought the case along with local branches and the academic group, described it "the primary constitutional case of the current government currently".

'Institution and Organization Occupy Opposing Positions'

While the legal success was praised by supporters and scholars nationwide, the director received no communication from Columbia following the ruling – an indication of the disagreements in the positions staked out by the institute and the university.

Prior to the administration began, Columbia had represented the declining tolerance for pro-Palestinian speech on American universities after it summoned officers to remove its student encampment, suspended multiple activists for their protests and dramatically restricted demonstrations on campus.

Institutional Agreement

This summer, the institution negotiated an agreement with the Trump administration to provide substantial funds to settle discrimination allegations and accept major restrictions on its independence in a action widely condemned as "capitulation" to the president's bullying tactics.

The university's submissive approach was starkly at odds with the Knight Institute's defiant one.

"This is a time in which the institution and the institute are on different sides of some of these critical questions," observed a former fellow at the free speech center.

Organization's Purpose

The Knight Institute was launched in 2016 and is located on the university grounds. It has received substantial support from the institution as part of an agreement that had each contributing millions in operating funds and long-term financing to launch it.

"Our vision for the organization in the years ahead 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, enough is enough, that's when the this organization who will have stepped forward," stated Lee Bollinger, a constitutional expert who established the institute.

Open Disagreement

Following campus developments, Columbia and the Knight Institute were positioned on different sides, with Knight frequently objecting to the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both privately and in progressively critical official comments.

In correspondence to campus administration, Jaffer condemned the decision to penalize two student groups, which the institution said had broken rules related to holding campus events.

Growing Conflict

Subsequently, the director again condemned the institution's choice to summon law enforcement onto campus to remove a non-violent, pro-Palestinian encampment – resulting in the detention of more than 100 students.

"Institutional policies are separated from the values that are essential for the academic community and purpose – including expression, academic freedom, and fair treatment," he stated in that instance.

Student Perspective

The detained student, specifically, had appealed to campus officials for support, and in a published article composed while jailed he stated that "the logic employed by the administration to target me and fellow students is an outgrowth of the university's suppression playbook concerning Palestinian issues".

Columbia settled with the federal government just days after the trial concluded in court.

Institute's Response

Following the agreement was announced, the Knight Institute published a strong criticism, stating that the agreement sanctions "an astonishing transfer of autonomy and authority to the government".

"University administration ought not agreed to these terms," the statement stated.

Broader Context

Knight doesn't stand alone – groups such as the ACLU, the free speech organization and additional rights organizations have challenged the government over free speech issues, as have labor organizations and other institutions.

Nor is it concentrating solely on university matters – in additional lawsuits to the Trump administration, the organization has sued on behalf of agricultural workers and climate activists opposing federal departments over climate-related information and fought the withholding of official reports.

Special Situation

But its protection of campus expression at a institution now associated with making concessions on it places it in a uniquely uneasy situation.

Jaffer expressed sympathy for the absence of "favorable choices" for university administration even as he described their agreement as a "major error". But he stressed that although the organization standing at the other side of its host when it comes to addressing the administration, the institution has permitted it to function free of pressure.

"Especially right now, I don't take this independence as automatic," he stated. "Should the university attempt to restrict our work, I wouldn't remain at the university any more."