Dozens of elite college papers back brief opposing Trump immigration policy
Elite student newspapers unite against alleged federal retaliation for pro-Palestinian speech.
Lawsuit backed by FIRE and SPLC accuses Trump policy of chilling international students’ 'free expression.'
More than 50 college newspapers — including The Harvard Crimson, The Stanford Daily, and UCLA’s Daily Bruin — have joined an amicus brief opposing what they call the Trump-era administration’s “targeting of noncitizens for political speech,” marking a coordinated show of activism among the news outlets of elite universities.
The Student Press Law Center (SPLC) filed the brief on Oct. 15 in support of The Stanford Daily’s lawsuit against the federal government. The lawsuit alleges that immigration officials used powers under the Immigration and Nationality Act to deport or revoke visas from international students who expressed pro-Palestinian views.
The student paper, represented by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), names Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem as defendants.
According to the complaint, several international students “asked to remove their names, quotes, or photographs” from the paper’s coverage, fearing retaliation. In an August statement, the paper said it noticed “an intensifying fear among international students” on campus.
Harvard’s student publication said its support was about defending free expression. “Freedom of speech is vital to The Crimson’s work,” Crimson President McKenna E. McKrell told the outlet. “International staffers deserve the same speech protections their peers are afforded.”
SPLC attorney Matthew S.L. Cate wrote that “student journalists — especially noncitizens — report declining participation, self-censorship, and withdrawal from public discourse.” Cate argued the policy “inflicts harm on the broader educational and democratic mission of the student press.”
[RELATED: Trump extends compact offer to colleges and universities nationwide]
The Daily Bruin called the government’s actions “brazen and unacceptable,” while The Daily at the University of Washington warned of a “chilling effect” on speech.
The administration has defended its actions, arguing that immigration enforcement falls under executive authority and that The Stanford Daily’s claims rely on “speculative injuries.”
Campus Reform has reached out to Harvard University for comment.