A federal judge has ruled that laws used by the Trump administration to revoke visas and initiate deportation proceedings against non-citizen college students for their pro-Palestinian advocacy and criticism of Israel are unconstitutional. US District Judge Noel Wise in San Jose, California, issued the decision on Friday, condemning the use of federal immigration law provisions to target individuals based on their expressed views.
The ruling specifically addressed actions taken from March 2025, when the Trump administration began canceling visas and detaining non-citizen students engaged in pro-Palestinian activism on university campuses. The case drew attention after the arrest of Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who is separately contesting deportation. The events led to a lawsuit filed in August 2025 by The Stanford Daily, Stanford University’s student newspaper. The newspaper alleged that some student writers holding visas had self-censored, avoiding coverage of pro-Palestinian protests and Middle East-related topics due to fear of government retaliation.
The lawsuit challenged two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act that allowed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to revoke visas at his discretion and to label individuals deportable if their actions were deemed to “compromise a compelling foreign policy interest.” Judge Wise ruled these provisions, as applied, violated the First and Fifth Amendments of the US Constitution, which protect free speech and due process. She emphasized that targeting individuals for their speech represents unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination.
In her decision, Wise noted that the strength of American democracy rests on the freedom to criticize the government and its leaders. She warned that allowing the government to punish speech could lead to a dangerous precedent where any dissenting opinion is subject to retaliation. “The government is singling out that speech for disfavored treatment based on its viewpoint or content,” she wrote, adding that such actions diminish the country’s democratic principles.
The ruling aligns with a similar decision issued last year by US District Judge William Young in Boston, who found the Trump administration’s policy of revoking visas and deporting students and faculty engaged in pro-Palestinian advocacy unconstitutional.
Conor Fitzpatrick, representing the student newspaper through the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, described the ruling as affirmation that free speech is an inalienable right, not a privilege. The ruling also expressed concern over the potential expansion of such policies to target individuals expressing other disfavored views.
The Departments of State and Homeland Security have not publicly responded to the ruling. The case underscores ongoing tensions in balancing national security, immigration enforcement, and constitutional protections for free expression.