Steve's News

This piece originally appeared in The New York Review of Books. We write as constitutional scholars—some liberal and some conservative—who seek to defend academic freedom and the First Amendment in the wake of the federal government’s recent treatment of Columbia University. The First Amendment protects speech many of us find wrongheaded or deeply offensive, including anti-Israel advocacy and even antisemitic advocacy. The government may not threaten funding cuts as a tool to pressure recipients into suppressing such viewpoints. This is especially so for universities, which should be committed to respecting free speech. At the same time, the First Amendment of course doesn’t protect antisemitic violence, true threats of violence, or certain kinds of speech that may properly be labeled “harassment.” Title VI rightly requires universities to protect their students and other community members from such behavior. But the lines between legally unprotected harassment on the one hand and protected speech on the other are notoriously difficult to draw and are often fact-specific. In part because of that, any sanctions imposed on universities for Title VI violations must follow that statute’s well-established procedural rules, which help make clear what speech is sanctionable and what speech is constitutionally protected. Yet the administration’s March 7 cancellation of $400 million in federal funding to Columbia University did not adhere to such procedural safeguards. Neither did its March 13 ultimatum stipulating that Columbia make numerous changes to its academic policies—including the demand that, within one week, it “provide a full plan” to place an entire “department under academic receivership for a minimum of five years”—as “a precondition for formal negotiations regarding Columbia University’s continued financial relationship with the United States government.” Under Title VI, the government may not cut off funds until it has conducted a program-by-program evaluation of the alleged violations; provided recipients with notice and “an opportunity for hearing”; limited any funding cutoff “to the particular program, or part thereof, in which… noncompliance has been…found”; and submitted a

Earlier this month, recent graduate, activist, soon-to-be father, and legal permanent resident Mahmoud Khalil, was arrested and detained in direct retaliation for his advocacy for Palestinian rights at Columbia University. Later, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) transferred him to a Louisiana detention facility 1,400 miles away from his home and his family. Following his illegal arrest, a team of lawyers, including Amy Greer from Dratel & Lewis, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and CLEAR secured a court order to block his deportation. Since then, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and Alina Das, co-director of the Immigrant Rights Clinic at New York University (NYU) School of Law have joined his legal team. His lawyers are arguing that his detention violates his constitutional rights, including free speech and due process, and goes beyond the government’s legal authority. Below, read a letter Khalil dictated over the phone from Immigrations and Customs (ICE) detention in Louisiana – his first public statement since his arrest. Letter from a Palestinian Political Prisoner in Louisiana March 18, 2025 My name is Mahmoud Khalil and I am a political prisoner. I am writing to you from a detention facility in Louisiana where I wake to cold mornings and spend long days bearing witness to the quiet injustices underway against a great many people precluded from the protections of the law. Who has the right to have rights? It is certainly not the humans crowded into the cells here. It isn’t the Senegalese man I met who has been deprived of his liberty for a year, his legal situation in limbo and his family an ocean away. It isn’t the 21-year-old detainee I met, who stepped foot in this country at age nine, only to be deported without so much as a hearing. Justice escapes the contours of this nation’s immigration facilities. “Justice escapes the contours of this nation’s immigration facilities.” On March 8, I was