Trump Administration's Deportation Efforts Against Pro-Palestine Activists Ruled Unconstitutional by Federal Judge

Federal Judge Rules Trump Administration Unconstitutionally Targeted Pro-Palestine Activists In a landmark decision released on September 30, 2025, U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young ruled that the Trump administration's efforts to deport noncitizen pro-Palestine activists were unconstitutional and aimed at suppressing critiques of Israel. According to the judicial opinion in AAUP v. Rubio, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, along with their subordinates, deliberately targeted noncitizens for deportation based on their First Amendment-protected political speech. Judge Young found that this action was a misuse of the Trump administration's powers and was intended to chill speech critical of Israel. "This is a new invention that in important ways goes beyond its closest analogues in the Red Scare," Judge Young wrote in his 161-page opinion, calling the case "perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court." The decision marks a significant victory for pro-Palestine activists and advocates for free speech. "This ruling sends a clear message that the government cannot use its powers to silence marginalized voices," said Dr. Ali Abunimah, co-founder of The Electronic Intifada. The Trump administration's actions were widely criticized by civil liberties groups and human rights organizations. "The targeting of pro-Palestine activists for deportation is a blatant attempt to suppress dissenting voices and undermine the First Amendment," said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. Background on the case dates back to 2019, when the Trump administration began cracking down on noncitizen pro-Palestine activists. The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) filed a lawsuit against Secretary Rubio and Secretary Noem in 2020, alleging that their actions were unconstitutional and aimed at suppressing free speech. The ruling has significant implications for society, as it sets a precedent for the protection of First Amendment rights for noncitizens. "This decision is a major victory for the principles of freedom of expression and association," said Dr. Abunimah. As the case continues to unfold, advocates for pro-Palestine activists are calling on lawmakers to pass legislation protecting the rights of marginalized communities. "We need to ensure that our laws protect the rights of all individuals, regardless of their citizenship status or political views," said Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN). The AAUP v. Rubio case is expected to have far-reaching consequences for free speech and civil liberties in the United States. By: Emily Chen, Staff Reporter Last updated: October 1, 2025 *Reporting by Theintercept.*