Cases & Developments

Annotated Judgment Vacating Defendants’ Enforcement Policy. Following a September ruling that the government’s enforcement policy implementing Executive Orders 14161 and 14188, violated the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the court issued an annotated judgment, declaring the enforcement policy “OF NO EFFECT, VOID, ILLEGAL, SET ASIDE, AND VACATED.” Further, pursuant to its equitable powers, the court imposed a “remedial sanction” that allows affected noncitizen members of the plaintiffs’ organizations to challenge adverse immigration actions, shifting the burden to the government to prove by clear and convincing evidence that such actions were not retaliatory or were otherwise lawful, while automatically staying removal during litigation.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Plaintiffs, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and several individual chapters and organizational plaintiffs, sued the federal government for violations of the First Amendment, Fifth Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), arguing that the government’s actions against noncitizen students and faculty who participated in pro-Palestinian protests amounted to an “ideological-deportation policy” in violation of their rights. Following a two-week trial, the court issued a 161-page ruling, holding that that the administration’s actions were an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment and also arbitrary and capricious in violation of the APA. On plaintiff’s First Amendment claims, the court found that the government had “engaged in a mode of enforcement leading to detaining, deporting, and revoking noncitizens’ visas solely on the basis of political speech, and with the intent of chilling such speech and that of others similarly situated.” The court held that these actions were unconstitutional and noted “the effect of these targeted deportation[s] [] continues [] to chill freedom of speech to this day.” In considering relief for the plaintiffs, the court concluded that “it will not do simply to order the Public Officials to cease and desist in the future,” but also outlined a number of “concerns” and “constraints” that will govern the upcoming remedy hearing. 

The U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and Workforce held a Committee Hearing titled, “Beyond the Ivy League: Stopping the Spread of Antisemitism on American Campuses” and requested testimony from the leadership of California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), DePaul University, and Haverford College. The letters sent to Cal Poly, DePaul University, and Haverford College state the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) assigned letter grades for each institution as set forth in ADL’s April 2025 “Campus Antisemitism Report Card,” which details its view as to the “current state of antisemitism on campus and how universities and colleges are responding.” The letters recount individual reports of alleged antisemitic activity on the campuses and asked the institutions to provide documentation evidencing changes to their respective student codes of conduct following October 7, 2023, and student organization funding, in addition to other information. The letters concluded that the purpose of the hearing was to provide campus leadership the opportunity to discuss the alleged incidents, subsequent student disciplinary actions taken, and any policy and practice amendments made to address campus antisemitism.