You Have Every Right to Snap That Picture

NEWARK, N.J. – The U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey ruled that the challenge to ICE’s unlawful detention of Mahmoud Khalil, a recent Columbia graduate student and lawful permanent resident, should continue in New Jersey. This marks the second time the Trump administration has unsuccessfully sought to transfer the case to Louisiana, following the March 19 ruling from Judge Furman of the Southern District of New York that the case should be heard in New Jersey. Mr. Khalil’s legal team had argued that if the court allowed this case to play out in Louisiana, this would be rewarding the Trump administration’s unlawful attempt to suppress dissent and manipulate federal court jurisdiction by transferring Mr. Khalil across state lines in the middle of the night. Dr. Noor Abdalla, wife of Mahmoud Khalil, said: “I am relieved at the court’s decision today to keep my husband’s ongoing case in New Jersey. This is an important step towards securing Mahmoud’s freedom, but there is still a lot more to be done. As the countdown to our son's birth begins and I inch closer and closer to my due date, I will continue to strongly advocate for Mahmoud’s freedom and for his safe return home so he can be by my side to welcome our first child.” Dr. Abdalla’s full statement is available here. In addition to asking the court to compel Mr. Khalil’s return from Louisiana, as well as seeking bail, his legal team is urging the court to grant a preliminary injunction (PI), which would immediately release him from custody to be reunited with his wife, who is nine months pregnant. If granted, the PI would also block President Trump’s policy of arresting and detaining noncitizens who have engaged in First Amendment protected activity in support of Palestinian rights. As the filings document, the Trump administration's invocation of a vague, rarely used provision of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act — the “foreign policy ground” — is retaliation for speech like Mr. Khalil's, which is protected by the First Amendment. Mr. Khalil is represented by Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights, CLEAR, Van Der Hout LLP, New York University Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), the ACLU of New Jersey, and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The following are quotes from Mr. Khalil’s legal team: Brett Max Kaufman, senior staff attorney, ACLU: “It is the fundamental job of the judiciary to stand up to this kind of government manipulation of our basic rights. We hope the court’s definitive ruling sends a strong message to other courts around the country facing government attempts to shop for favorable jurisdictions by moving people detained on unconstitutional immigration charges around and making it difficult or impossible for their lawyers to know where to seek their immediate release.” Baher Azmy, Legal Director of Center for Constitutional Rights: “We are grateful the court wisely understood that the government cannot try to manipulate the jurisdiction of the United States courts in a transparent attempt to shield their unconstitutional – and frankly chilling – behavior. We look forward to the next phase of this case, which is to get Mahmoud out of detention and into the arms of his family, and then to prove the Trump administration’s attempted deportation of Mahmoud and others is nothing but unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech.” Amol Sinha, executive director, ACLU-NJ: “Mr. Khalil has been unlawfully detained in direct retaliation of his advocacy in support of Palestinian rights. The federal government continues to prolong proceedings despite knowing that targeting a lawful permanent resident over protected speech is indefensible in a court of law. We’re grateful the court has ordered the case to continue in the District of New Jersey, so Mr. Khalil is one step closer to returning to his family.” Amy Greer, associate attorney at Dratel + Lewis: “Today we moved one step closer to vindicating Mr. Khalil’s rights by challenging his unlawful detention and the administration’s unconstitutional and retaliatory actions against him.” Donna Lieberman, executive director, NYCLU: “With this ruling, the Court has rightfully reaffirmed that Mahmoud Khalil’s case belongs in New Jersey — significantly closer to his wife, community, and legal counsel. The Trump administration has attempted to manipulate the judiciary to suppress speech that supports Palestinian rights. While the trauma ICE has inflicted on Mr. Khalil and his nine-months pregnant wife, Dr. Noor Abdalla, is irreparable, this is a step towards bringing him home.” Ramzi Kassem, co-director, CLEAR: “The court's decision today clears the way for what really matters: continuing the legal fight to bring Mahmoud home so he can reunite with Noor and resume his defense of Palestinian rights.”

BOSTON – Rümeysa Öztürk, a PhD student at Tufts University, was grabbed, arrested, and detained in Somerville, Massachusetts by plainclothes federal agents this week in apparent retaliation for a Tufts Daily op-ed she co-authored last year. Ms. Öztürk is a former Fulbright scholar who came to the United States on a student visa. Early this morning, her legal team — now including the American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and CLEAR, alongside attorney Mahsa Khanbabai — filed an amended habeas petition and complaint with the federal court in the District of Massachusetts, challenging her unconstitutional detention by ICE. Attorney Khanbabai represented Ms. Öztürk in emergency filings on Tuesday, resulting in a court order that Ms. Öztürk not be removed from Massachusetts without prior notice. Sometime after that order, ICE officials transferred Ms. Öztürk to Louisiana without notifying the court, her counsel, or Department of Justice counsel. Counsel for the government has stated that he has been informed Ms. Öztürk was detained outside of Massachusetts at the time the original petition was filed, but has not provided evidence of Ms. Öztürk’s location at the time the petition was filed, or suggested that she was not in the custody and control of ICE officials in Massachusetts. For nearly 24 hours, Ms. Öztürk’s friends, family, and counsel could not locate or contact her. When her attorney was finally able to speak with her, they learned that she had suffered an asthma attack while en route to Louisiana. Ms. Öztürk has not been charged with or accused of any crime. When asked about Ms. Öztürk’s case, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed revoking her visa, adding, “we gave you a visa to come and study and get a degree, not to become a social activist that tears up our university campuses.” The new amended petition argues that Ms. Öztürk’s detention violates her constitutional rights, including free speech and due process. It asks the court to order that she be immediately returned to Massachusetts and released from custody. The following are quotes from Ms. Öztürk’s legal team: Mahsa Khanbabai, attorney at Khanbabai Immigration Law: “Rümeysa Öztürk’s experience is shocking, cruel, and unconstitutional. For nearly 24 hours, we could not locate her, and despite a court order to prevent the government from taking her out of Massachusetts, we finally learned the Trump administration had shipped her to Louisiana. Criticizing U.S. foreign policy and human rights violations is neither illegal nor grounds for detention. The government must immediately release Rümeysa to continue her studies and rejoin her community.” Carol Rose, executive director of the ACLU of Massachusetts: “Rümeysa Öztürk’s unlawful arrest and detention is yet another escalation of this administration’s efforts to silence speech. No person, regardless of their immigration status, can be arrested, detained, or deported as punishment for their political views. Ideas – and certainly op-eds – are not illegal. The First Amendment protects all of us.” Jessie Rossman, legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts: “Grabbing someone off the streets, stripping them of their student visa, and detaining them solely based on political viewpoint is an affront to all of our constitutional rights. We will not stop fighting until Ms. Öztürk is free to return to her loved ones and until we know the government will not abuse immigration law to punish those who speak up for what they believe.” Brian Hauss, senior staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union: “The footage of Ms. Öztürk’s abduction should send chills down the spine of every American who cares about free speech. The disappearance of students for their political beliefs is the hallmark of dictatorships and has no place in a free society.” Mudassar Toppa, staff attorney at CLEAR, a legal nonprofit and clinic at CUNY School of Law: “What's happening to Rümeysa just because she expressed her sincerely held beliefs in support for Palestinian human rights is unconscionably cruel. No one should have to face the prospect of being stalked, abducted, and shipped off to a detention center a thousand miles away just because they exercised their first amendment rights. We will pursue all legal avenues on her behalf until she’s freed.”

PROVIDENCE, R.I. — On behalf of art organizations, the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Rhode Island argued today that an ideological restriction from the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) on grant funding violates the First Amendment, the Fifth Amendment, and the Administrative Procedure Act. In response to an executive order from the Trump administration earlier this year, the NEA imposed a new requirement that forced grant applicants to attest that they would not use funds to promote “gender ideology” and that blocked any projects that the government could perceive as “promoting gender ideology” from being eligible for funding. The ACLU and the ACLU of Rhode Island filed suit in March. In response to the lawsuit, the NEA agreed to drop the certification requirement until the case was decided. It subsequently extended the application deadline to April 7 and temporarily removed the funding block until the agency determines how to implement the executive order by April 30. The government has not disavowed reimposing the exact same eligibility prohibition and any prohibition will retroactively apply to current applicants, who must submit by April 7 and will have no opportunity to alter or amend their applications. “The government is playing games with our clients’ First Amendment rights,” said Vera Eidelman, senior staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project. “We are in court today to make sure that the NEA can’t pull a bait-and-switch on arts organizations by allowing them to apply free of restrictions, only to disqualify them later. The temporarily suspended rules must be struck down to safeguard artistic expression and First Amendment protections for all.” The basis for the contested NEA requirements is a January 2025 executive order, signed by President Donald Trump, that directs that “[f]ederal funds shall not be used to promote gender ideology.” “We have used NEA funding to provide a safe haven for censored queer artists around the globe since 2019,” said Rose Oser, Producing Director of National Queer Theater. “Losing the right to compete for that funding does not just impact our budgets. It sends a message that trans artists and trans stories do not deserve to be heard. But we will not be silenced. We will not entertain this administration’s aggressive efforts to push trans people out of public life, and we won’t allow them to bend the arts world to fit their narrow definitions of gender.” The ACLU, the ACLU of Rhode Island, David Cole, and Lynette Labinger, cooperating counsel for the ACLU-RI, filed suit earlier this month in the U.S. District Court of Rhode Island on behalf of Rhode Island Latino Arts; National Queer Theater; The Theater Offensive; and the Theater Communications Group. "Rhode Island Latino Arts would like to apply for a grant that could potentially run afoul of the ban on 'promoting gender ideology,' however the NEA defines that nebulous term,” said Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island. “Because the NEA has now declared that they will not let applicants know whether they are going to impose this condition until after the grant application deadline has passed, RILA has been placed in an impossible position in applying for funds. Without a court order clearly barring the NEA's use of this unconstitutional criterion, Rhode Island arts groups — and arts organizations across the country — will be left in an intolerable state of limbo."