By: Mira Costello
Editor-in-Chief
Following multiple arrests, detentions and removals of noncitizen university students who engaged in protests on their campuses, the American Association of University Professors filed a lawsuit seeking to block similar actions in the future.
The March 25 case – American Association of University Professors v. Rubio – has five plaintiffs: the national AAUP; its chapters from Harvard, NYU and Rutgers; and the Middle East Studies Association. The first defendant in the case is Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and others include Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons, President Donald Trump and the United States itself.
Filed in Massachusetts, the civil action alleges that the Trump administration has enacted a “policy of ideological deportation,” targeting noncitizen students like Mahmoud Khalil who engage in certain types of expression and association, particularly criticism of Israel and advocacy for Palestinian self-determination (for example, at events like the pro-Palestine encampment at IU Bloomington last summer). Currently, there are no reported cases of IU students facing arrest or deportation for this.
The defendants allege that the administration’s policy violates the First and Fifth Amendments as well as the Administrative Procedure Act, which establishes how federal agencies can issue regulations and what actions they can take. In the complaint, they describe the policy as “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and contrary to constitutional right” and say it “exceeds [the government’s] statutory authority.”
IU South Bend has a small AAUP chapter headed by Dr. Jake Mattox, an English professor. While no IU AAUP chapters are involved with the lawsuit directly, Mattox said our campus chapter has discussed the issues.
He expressed concern about how the immigration actions have been handled – for example, involving plainclothes officers and unmarked vehicles – and said they show worrying similarities to authoritarianism. He added that IU South Bend serves many international students and others who may have varying types of citizenship and residency documents, and that protecting free speech for them and others is important.
Note: Mattox clarified that views expressed here represent only his own beliefs, not those of IU South Bend or another entity.
“The long tradition in U.S. history of campus free speech and protest has been essential for maintaining and exercising free speech in a democracy. Campuses have been key locations for that,” he said. “In a civil society and a democratic society, spaces that are regularly sites of free speech and protest are not a threat to democracy – they’re the very bones of democracy.”
While IU campuses have not been targeted for immigration sweeps, IU Bloomington was one of 60 schools that received a letter from the Department of Education March 8 alleging they may have violated the Civil Rights Act by failing to address antisemitism on campus. The antisemitism in question is often attributed to pro-Palestinian student actions, including protests and demands for divestment from Israel.
Mattox said he finds the use of antisemitism to target protesters troubling.
“Antisemitism exists and it matters, and it’s hugely important and disturbing,” he said. “But it’s really disturbing when, for political purposes, someone chooses to redefine antisemitism in such a broad and blanket and uncritical way. The ability to publicly analyze, expose, talk about a government’s actions and its military’s actions is not the same thing as the very real and very problematic and very disturbing hatred that antisemitism is rooted in.”
IU Bloomington faces potential loss of federal funding because of the antisemitism letter, and all public educational institutions (including IU campuses) received a “dear colleague” letter from the ED Feb. 14, also threatening withdrawal of federal funds if they did not cease race-based Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives.
At the time of publication, neither central IU nor IU South Bend have issued public statements addressing the letters. Mattox said he was not aware of any relevant guidance provided to faculty by administrators, and that he heard mixed reports from colleagues about whether and to what degree these issues may have been addressed during faculty meetings. This semester’s available meeting minutes from the Faculty Senate do not indicate discussion of noncitizen students, but the minutes from their most recent March 28 meeting had not been posted by the time of publication.
Mattox said while he understands the valid reasons behind the university’s reticence, he hopes that they will not “go too far in their efforts to placate these government attacks” as he says some schools seem to have done.
“I get it that universities need to tread carefully,” he said. “On the other hand, there’s an argument to be made that if we’re not out there visibly defending academic freedom and free speech, that’s just contributing to its erosion.”
National AAUP President Todd Wolfson, a journalism and media professor at Rutgers, is quoted on aaup.org saying that he believes pro-Palestine protesters and international scholars are the first to be targeted, but not the last.
“We all have to draw a line together – as the old labor movement slogan says: an injury to one is an injury to all,” Wolfson said.
Mattox expressed a similar sentiment, saying that campus communities need to use all possible resources to stand up for freedom of expression for everyone.
“Even if we think that the administration won’t go after citizens, that shouldn’t make us rest,” he said. “It’s not okay that they’re going after people who are here to study, they have visas, they have green cards, et cetera. It’s not okay that they’re going after them, even if citizens don’t feel like they ever have to worry.”
He emphasized that universities, like the press, should offer a forum for difficult issues to be discussed freely.
“These are the principles that have, in part, made the U.S. university system to be considered in some ways the global standard for the last 120 years,” he said. “I mean, keeping things at the forefront, speaking truths out loud, being public, I don’t know that there’s any alternative, actually, to all those. To me, the stakes are really high.”
To read the AAUP’s full complaint and keep up with the case, visit knightcolumbia.org/cases/auup-v-rubio.
