Federal judge blocks immigration authorities from revoking international students’ legal status

Updated: 4:41 PM EDT May 22, 2025

Good afternoon. Uh, my name is Jessie Rossman. I’m the legal director at the ACLU of Massachusetts. I’d like to make sure that co-counsel are able to introduce themselves who are up there with me today. I, uh, this is Modua Topa, M U D *** S S *** R, last name Topa, T O P PA with the Clear Project and Main Street Legal Services. Good afternoon, Nour Zafer, senior staff attorney with ACLU National. Hello, Monica Allard. I’m *** staff attorney with the ACLU of Vermont. What we heard from the court today is what we have been saying for weeks and what courts have continued to repeat up and down through the litigation of this case thus far. There’s absolutely no evidence that justifies detaining Ms. Ozturk for *** single day, let alone the 6.5 weeks that she has been detained because she wrote *** single op ed in her students. Exercising her First Amendment right to express an opinion. What the court said today was that she had satisfied her burden. She had established that she had what he called very significant 1st Amendment and 5th Amendment due process claims, which will be litigated during her habeas petition hearing before this Court, and in the interim she will be released on bail immediately from Louisiana. He has One of the dangers of what we are seeing in the government’s behavior in this case is the very strong message it sends to people who are watching that you can be punished by your speech, and what we heard from the court today was confirmation that that is not what we do in this country, that the First Amendment protects your right to speak. It protects your ability to remain at liberty and free, and Ms. Ozturk is going to be walking out of the Louisiana detention center today with another one of our co-counsel so that she can come home, she can come back to her community, she can come back to Summerville, she can come back to her academics, and she can continue the life that she should be able to live. She is free. She is free. She is free. We are so thrilled that Remesa gets to go back to her Tufts community where, as we heard today, she is so beloved and so deeply valued by her peers, by her professors, by her deans, and by everyone else on campus who dearly and deeply misses her and is so excited for her to be back so that she can continue her studies and continue working on the things that she’s passionate about. And we are so glad that the court affirmed something that we knew all along that the government has literally only one single piece of evidence for detaining Remesa and that is the op ed that she wrote in her in her student newspaper expressing views that the government disagrees with their dislikes and the court. Affirm today the basic and fundamental First Amendment principle that we all hold dear that that is not something that you can lock people up for. So we’re so excited and so happy for Mesa and we’re we’re so happy that this Court affirmed the basic principles that we’ve been fighting for all along and will continue to fight for. Six weeks ago ICE agents abducted Ramesa um from her community in retaliation for her speech defending Palestinian human rights. The court’s decision today, um, explicitly acknowledges that. This type of retaliatory conduct chills the speech of not just Remesa but millions of non-citizens in this country and it’s explicitly in violation of the Constitution. We are appreciative of the court granting Ms Austurk Ramesa released today. And we are moved by the court’s reflection, very thoughtful reflection of all of the evidence that has been put forward by by Ms. Oturk and the complete lack of evidence being put forth by the government and the court’s conclusion that Ms. Austurk is absolutely not *** danger to her community, not *** flight risk, but an asset to her community, someone who’s dedicated her life to her academic. Um, pursuits to her completion of her PhD in the service of children, I think is *** reflection of, of why the government’s conduct in this case was just so, uh, objectionable. Um, I’m, I’m gonna let my colleagues speak and I’m, I’m gonna also read *** statement from, um, Ms. Oserk’s other attorney who’s with her currently at the Louisiana detention facility, um, and, and I, I’ll, I’ll read that statement shortly. It Being detained for 6 weeks for writing an op ed in your in your school newspaper is *** constitutional horror story, um, and as the court said today her detention cannot stand uh today the court decided that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of her dangerousness and instead found repeated evidence of her peaceful nature um we are. So so glad that Rimesa can continue to her studies that she can return to her community that misses her so desperately and I think we all heard directly from Rimesa today that uh in *** way that her light just shines through, um, she’s clearly such *** caring, compassionate person and today we made good on the First Amendment promise of free speech and Ramis is going home. So I’m reading the statement from um Masa Khababi who’s with Ramesa uh currently at the Louisiana detention center. Ramesa and I thank you for your support. We are relieved and ecstatic that she has been ordered release. Unfortunately, it has uh it is 45 days too late. She has been imprisoned all these days for simply writing an op ed that called for human rights and dignity for the people in Palestine. When did speaking up against oppression become *** crime? When did speaking up against genocide become something to be imprisoned for? The Trump administration has robbed Ramesa and many of the roughly 900 women detained in Geo’s for-profit prison of their freedoms, despite never being charged with the crime. We are thankful that the courts have been ruling in favor of detained political prisoners like Remesa, like Mohsen Madawi, and we Await the release of others like Mahmoud Khalil, Doctor Suri, Leakordia, and others. The public plays an important role in upholding our constitutional rights. Please continue to speak up for democracy and civil rights in every space, including our elected offices, our universities, and our halls of justice.

Advertisement

Federal judge blocks immigration authorities from revoking international students’ legal status

Updated: 4:41 PM EDT May 22, 2025

A judge in California blocked the Trump administration Thursday from terminating the legal status of international students nationwide while a court case challenging previous terminations is pending.The order by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White in Oakland bars the government from arresting, incarcerating or moving students elsewhere based on their legal status until the case is resolved. Students could still be arrested for other reasons and their legal status can still be revoked if they are convicted of a violent crime carrying a prison term of more than a year.Most courts hearing these types of cases have granted protections to the person suing, but White said the government’s actions “wreaked havoc” not only on the lives of plaintiffs but other nonimmigrants in the U.S. on student visas.White, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, a Republican, issued the nationwide injunction sought by attorneys for about two dozen students who sued after their legal status was abruptly terminated in early April by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.More than 4,700 international students had their permission to study in the U.S. canceled this spring, with little notice or explanation, as part of President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigrants and foreign nationals. In court hearings, Department of Homeland Security officials said they ran the names of student visa holders through an FBI-run database that contains the names of suspects and people who have been arrested, even if the charges were dropped or they were never charged with a crime.Some students left the U.S. rather than risk being deported to a third country.Government lawyers say the administration is exercising its prerogative to administer the Immigration and Nationality Act. They say students do not need the court’s protections because ICE reinstated legal status and was mailing status reactivation letters to affected students.But White found those actions insufficient. He said that the erroneous revocation remained in the students’ record, impacting their ability to obtain a new visa or change their nonimmigrant status. Some students are still dealing with fallout from the previous terminations and there is no guarantee they won’t have their legal status revoked again on a whim.He also chastised the administration for unveiling new policies or new actions in an apparent attempt to satisfy the courts’ concerns.“It is unclear how this game of whack-a-mole will end unless Defendants are enjoined from skirting their own mandatory regulations,” White wrote.A survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs research found that even the visa revocations for students who participated in pro-Palestinian protests are more unpopular than popular. About half of U.S. adults oppose this policy, and only 3 in 10 are in support. Among college educated adults, 6 in 10 strongly oppose, compared with 4 in 10 who aren’t college graduates.

SAN FRANCISCO —

A judge in California blocked the Trump administration Thursday from terminating the legal status of international students nationwide while a court case challenging previous terminations is pending.

The order by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White in Oakland bars the government from arresting, incarcerating or moving students elsewhere based on their legal status until the case is resolved. Students could still be arrested for other reasons and their legal status can still be revoked if they are convicted of a violent crime carrying a prison term of more than a year.

Advertisement

Most courts hearing these types of cases have granted protections to the person suing, but White said the government’s actions “wreaked havoc” not only on the lives of plaintiffs but other nonimmigrants in the U.S. on student visas.

White, who was nominated by President George W. Bush, a Republican, issued the nationwide injunction sought by attorneys for about two dozen students who sued after their legal status was abruptly terminated in early April by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

More than 4,700 international students had their permission to study in the U.S. canceled this spring, with little notice or explanation, as part of President Donald Trump’s crackdown on immigrants and foreign nationals. In court hearings, Department of Homeland Security officials said they ran the names of student visa holders through an FBI-run database that contains the names of suspects and people who have been arrested, even if the charges were dropped or they were never charged with a crime.

Some students left the U.S. rather than risk being deported to a third country.

Government lawyers say the administration is exercising its prerogative to administer the Immigration and Nationality Act. They say students do not need the court’s protections because ICE reinstated legal status and was mailing status reactivation letters to affected students.

But White found those actions insufficient. He said that the erroneous revocation remained in the students’ record, impacting their ability to obtain a new visa or change their nonimmigrant status. Some students are still dealing with fallout from the previous terminations and there is no guarantee they won’t have their legal status revoked again on a whim.

He also chastised the administration for unveiling new policies or new actions in an apparent attempt to satisfy the courts’ concerns.

“It is unclear how this game of whack-a-mole will end unless Defendants are enjoined from skirting their own mandatory regulations,” White wrote.

A survey by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs research found that even the visa revocations for students who participated in pro-Palestinian protests are more unpopular than popular. About half of U.S. adults oppose this policy, and only 3 in 10 are in support. Among college educated adults, 6 in 10 strongly oppose, compared with 4 in 10 who aren’t college graduates.

Source