Judge sounds alarm in ruling denouncing Trump's targeting student protesters
In a blistering ruling, a Reagan-appointed judge likened the masking of ICE agents to the KKK and tore into Trump's "bullying" tactics
Some news articles of historic rulings miss the beating heart of outrage in the judge’s prose.
Support journalism that conveys the heat of the cold record.
On its surface, the blistering ruling written by Ronald Reagan-appointed Senior U.S. District Judge William Young found Donald Trump and leaders of his government agencies liable for violating the First Amendment rights of pro-Palestinian student protesters.
But Judge Young’s 161-page findings of fact and rulings of law also sound the alarm on the government’s bullying and writes more than a dozen pages on “JUSTICE IN THE TRUMP ERA.”
Leading off with a missive sent to his chambers in June, Young reproduces an anonymous postcard scrawled with the message: “TRUMP HAS PARDONS AND TANKS…. WHAT DO YOU HAVE?” He answers the question defiantly before the start of his ruling.
“Alone, I have nothing but my sense of duty,” Young wrote. “Together, We the People of the United States –- you and me -- have our magnificent Constitution.”
Judge Young said he will schedule a separate hearing to determine the remedy for the Trump government’s First Amendment violations.
“To terrorize Americans into quiescence”
Early in his ruling, Judge Young frames the case filed by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the Middle East Studies Association (MESA) as a uniquely significant one in his four-decade long judicial tenure
“This case—perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court—squarely presents the issue of whether non-citizens lawfully present here in [the] United States actually have the same free speech rights as the rest of us,” Young wrote. “The Court answers this Constitutional question unequivocally ‘yes, they do.’ ‘No law’ means ‘no law.’ The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction and it is not to be found in our history or jurisprudence.”
Led by Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, the academic advocacy groups challenged the Trump government’s practice of targeting student protesters. Students like Mahmoud Khalil, Rümeysa Öztürk, Mohsen Mahdawi, and Badar Khan Suri previously sued in their individual capacities, and judges presiding over their cases have largely found that they were targeted for their political opinions.
Young’s ruling affirms that Kristi Noem, Marco Rubio and “their several agents and subordinates acted in concert to misuse the sweeping powers of their respective offices to target non-citizen pro-Palestinians for deportation primarily on account of their First Amendment protected political speech.”
“They did so in order to strike fear into similarly situated non-citizen pro-Palestinian individuals, pro-actively (and effectively) curbing lawful pro-Palestinian speech and intentionally denying such individuals (including the plaintiffs here) the freedom of speech that is their right,” the ruling’s conclusion states. “Moreover, the effect of these targeted deportation proceedings continues unconstitutionally to chill freedom of speech to this day.”
Reflecting on Öztürk’s case, Judge Young quoted someone’s “fair question” in a video showing masked agents arresting her.
“Why are you hiding your faces?” a voice asked in the video.
During a nine-day bench trial, Young listened to evidence on that and other questions and came to a brutal conclusion.
“ICE goes masked for a single reason -- to terrorize Americans into quiescence. Small wonder ICE often seems to need our respected military to guard them as they go about implementing our immigration laws. It should be noted that our troops do not ordinarily wear masks. Can you imagine a masked marine? It is a matter of honor -- and honor still matters. To us, masks are associated with cowardly desperados and the despised Ku Klux Klan. In all our history we have never tolerated an armed masked secret police.”
Government officials argued at trial that non-citizens could be deported for any reason, but the judge corrected that proposition obliquely.
“This Court in part must agree: non-citizens are, indeed, in a sense our guests,” Young wrote. “How we treat our guests is a question of constitutional scope, because who we are as a people and as a nation is an important part of how we must interpret the fundamental laws that constrain us. We are not, and we must not become, a nation that imprisons and deports people because we are afraid of what they have to tell us.”
“Is he correct?”
An 85-year-old jurist, Judge Young has emerged as one of the most fiery voices on the federal bench in Trump’s second term. He previously denounced Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s National Institutes of Health grant cuts in the name of combating “Diversity Equity and Inclusion” policies as the worst instance of government racial discrimination he had seen.
In more than a dozen pages after his formal ruling, Young wrote that Trump’s “bullying” and “retribution” poses a unique threat to the First Amendment.
“The President’s palpable misunderstanding that the government simply cannot seek retribution for speech he disdains poses a great threat to Americans’ freedom of speech,” the ruling states. “It is at this juncture that the judiciary has robustly rebuffed the President and his administration.”
Quoting the man who appointed him to the federal bench, Young cited Reagan’s 1967 inaugural address as the governor of California: “Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.”
Judge Young ends his opinion with a reflection on that speech.
“I first heard these words of President Reagan’s back in 2007 when my son quoted them in the Law Day celebration speech at the Norfolk Superior Court. I was deeply moved and hold these words before me as a I discharge judicial duties. As I’ve read and re-read the record in this case, listened widely, and reflected extensively, I’ve come to believe that President Trump truly understands and appreciates the full import of President Reagan’s inspiring message –- yet I fear he has drawn from it a darker, more cynical message. I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected.
Is he correct?”
At the end of his ruling, the judge promised to “promptly” schedule a hearing to determine the government’s penalty, and he added a message to the heckler who sent the postcard to his chambers.
Read the ruling in full here.
Every American that values liberty and freedom of speech needs to read this fine ruling and stand up against the unconstititional actions of this administration.
Unlike other recent recipients, Judge Young truly deserves a Medal of Freedom. Thank you Judge Young, and many others like you, for trying to preserve faith in the judiciary.