🔗 Share this article

After government officers arrested the university student Mahmoud Khalil in his university residence, Jameel Jaffer knew a major battle lay ahead.

Jaffer heads a Columbia-affiliated center focused on defending free speech protections. Khalil, a green card holder, had been active in Palestinian solidarity encampments on campus. Months earlier, Jaffer's organization had hosted a conference about free speech rights for immigrants.

"We recognized this connection with this situation, 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

Last week, Jaffer's team at the free speech organization, together with the law firm Sher Tremonte, secured a significant legal win when a district court judge in Boston ruled that the detention and planned removal of the student and additional activists was unconstitutional and purposely created to suppress protest.

Government officials announced they'll challenge the verdict, with White House spokesperson a spokeswoman describing the ruling an "outrageous ruling that hampers the protection of the country".

Increasing Separation Between Institute and Institution

This decision raised the visibility of the Knight Institute, propelling it to the forefront of the battle against Trump over fundamental American values. However the win also highlighted the widening chasm between the organization and the university that houses it.

This legal challenge – described by the presiding official as "perhaps the significant ever come under the jurisdiction of this district court" – was the first of multiple opposing Trump's unprecedented assault on universities to reach court proceedings.

Court Testimony

During the court proceedings, citizen and noncitizen scholars testified about the atmosphere of fear and silencing caused by the arrests, while immigration officials revealed details about their dependence on reports by rightwing, Israel-supporting groups to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, general counsel of the American Association of University Professors, which brought the case along with some of its chapters and the Middle East Studies Association, described it "the central civil rights case of the current government this time around".

'University and Institute Are On Opposing Positions'

While the legal success was hailed by supporters and scholars nationwide, Jaffer heard nothing from university leadership after the ruling – an indication of the disagreements in the positions staked out by the organization and the institution.

Even before Trump took office, Columbia had represented the declining tolerance for pro-Palestinian speech on American universities after it summoned officers to clear its campus protest, disciplined multiple activists for their activism and severely limited demonstrations on campus.

University Settlement

Recently, the institution reached a deal with the federal government to pay millions to resolve antisemitism claims and accept significant limitations on its independence in a move widely condemned as "capitulation" to the administration's pressure strategies.

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

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

Organization's Purpose

The Knight Institute was established in recent years and is located on the Columbia campus. It has obtained substantial support from the university as part of an arrangement that had each contributing substantial amounts in operating funds and long-term financing to establish the center.

"My hope for the organization in the years ahead is that when there is a time when the administration has gone in the wrong direction and constitutional protections are at stake and few others is prepared to step forward and to declare, enough is enough, that's when the Knight Institute that will taken action," stated Lee Bollinger, a constitutional expert who established the institute.

Public Criticism

Shortly after recent events, Columbia and the Knight Institute found themselves on opposing sides, with Knight frequently objecting to the university's handling of campus demonstrations both in private communications and in progressively critical public statements.

In one letter to university leadership, the director condemned the action to suspend two student groups, which the university said had broken rules concerning holding campus events.

Growing Conflict

Later, the director again condemned the institution's choice to summon police onto campus to remove a peaceful, student protest – leading to the detention of numerous activists.

"The university's decisions have become separated from the principles that are central to the university's life and mission – such as free speech, scholarly independence, and fair treatment," he stated in that instance.

Activist Viewpoint

Khalil, specifically, had appealed to university administrators for protection, and in an op-ed written from detention he stated that "the logic used by the federal government to target myself and my peers is a direct extension of the university's suppression approach regarding Palestinian issues".

The university reached agreement with the federal government just days after the case wrapped in court.

Institute's Response

Shortly after the deal was announced, the Knight Institute published a strong criticism, stating that the settlement approves "a remarkable shift of autonomy and authority to the administration".

"Columbia's leaders ought not agreed to this," the declaration said.

Wider Impact

The institute doesn't stand alone – groups such as the civil liberties union, the Foundation for Individual Rights and additional civil liberties groups have opposed the Trump administration over free speech issues, as have labor organizations and Harvard University.

Nor is it exclusively focusing on university matters – in additional lawsuits to the Trump administration, the institute has filed cases on behalf of agricultural workers and climate activists opposing government agencies over climate-related information and fought the withholding of official reports.

Special Situation

However its protection of student speech at a institution now associated with making concessions on it places it in a particularly difficult situation.

The director showed understanding for the lack of "good options" for university administration while he described their agreement as a "serious mistake". But he stressed that despite the organization standing at the opposite end of its parent institution when it comes to dealing with the administration, the university has permitted it to operate free of pressure.

"Particularly currently, I appreciate that freedom as automatic," he stated. "Should the university attempt to limit our activities, I wouldn't remain at the university any longer."