During a federal trial in Boston that concluded on Monday, two academic groups, the American Association of University Professors and the Middle East Studies Association, argued that the Trump administration's policy of deporting international students for expressing anti-Israel views is inconsistent with the First Amendment. The plaintiffs asked U.S. District Judge William Young for a preliminary injunction barring the Trump administration from enforcing its "ideological deportation policy." The government's lawyers responded by denying that any such policy exists.
William Kanellis, a Justice Department trial lawyer, likened the plaintiffs in AAUP v. Rubio to Don Quixote, jousting at windmills they mistake for giants. Their case, he said, is based on nothing more than "imagination and creative conjuring." John Armstrong, who runs the State Department's Bureau of Consular Affairs, echoed that assessment when he took the stand, saying, "It's silly to suggest that there's such a policy."
That position is pretty audacious in light of the many times that President Donald Trump and his underlings have bragged about seeking to expel students whose pro-Palestinian advocacy they view as antisemitic or pro-Hamas. The government's gaslighting strategy suggests those officials, despite insisting that this supposedly imaginary initiative has nothing to do with freedom of speech, are not confident that federal courts will agree.
