
Lawsuit
American Association of University Professors v. Rubio
A case challenging the Trump administration’s policy of ideological deportation.
On March 25, 2025, the Knight Institute filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s policy of arresting, detaining, and deporting noncitizen students and faculty who participate in pro-Palestinian activism. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), AAUP’s Harvard, NYU, and Rutgers campus chapters, and the Middle East Studies Association, argues that the policy chills noncitizens from speaking and, by extension, robs these organizations and their U.S. citizen members of noncitizens’ perspectives on a matter of significant public debate.
The lawsuit responds to a climate of repression and fear on university campuses. Federal agencies are attempting to deport multiple individuals for their pro-Palestinian advocacy, including Mahmoud Khalil, a leader of protests at Columbia University. These actions have sent chills through the community of noncitizen students and faculty on campuses around the country, causing some to pull out of academic conferences, stay home from protests, and withdraw from other forms of public advocacy and engagement.
The lawsuit alleges that the administration’s policy of ideological deportation violates the First Amendment right of the plaintiffs to hear from and associate with noncitizen students and faculty, that it is unconstitutionally vague, and that it violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The suit seeks a court order declaring that the policy is unlawful and enjoining the federal government from enforcing it.
Status: On April 29, 2025, the district court largely denied the government’s motion to dismiss. On June 2, 2025, the court denied the government’s motion for a protective order to bar discovery and dispense with a trial on the merits. The case is scheduled for a trial on July 7, 2025.
Case Information: American Association of University Professors v. Rubio, No. 1:25-cv-10685 (D.Mass), 25-1658 (1st Cir.).
Press Statements
-
Court Sets Expedited Trial in Challenge to Deportation of Student Protesters
-
Federal Court Says First Amendment Bars Government From Deporting Students and Faculty on Basis of Political Viewpoint, Says Challenge to Trump Policy Can Go Forward
-
Knight Institute Asks Court to Block Trump Policy of Deporting Students and Faculty for Lawful Speech
-
AAUP, Middle East Studies Association, Knight Institute Sue Over Trump Policy of Arresting and Threatening to Deport Students and Faculty for Lawful Speech
Analysis
Legal Filings
Click to highlight response chains
-
1st Cir.
-
Government's Motion for Leave to File (supplemental reply)
-
Proposed Supplemental Reply
-
Clerk's Supplemental Certificate of the Record on Appeal
-
Plaintiffs' Supplemental Answer
-
Order (granting government's request for stay of any further disclosure of documents)
-
Plaintiffs' Answer
-
Government's Petition for a Writ of Mandamus & Emergency Motion for Stay
-
-
D.Mass.
-
Order (granting plaintiffs' motion to seal)
-
Clerk's Supplemental Certificate of the Record on Appeal
-
Transmittal to the US. Court of Appeals for the 1st Cir.
-
Excerpt
-
Transcript
-
Exhibit HN
-
Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine to Exclude (defendants' proposed summary exhibit under Federal Rule of Evidence 1006)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal (proposal for how to proceed in light of the first circuit's order)
-
Clerk Notes (re: day 6 of trial)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for Additional Trial Time
-
Notice (re: trial schedule)
-
Order (re: stay by 1st Cir.)
-
Clerk Notes (re: day 5 of trial)
-
Government's Notice of Manual Filing (documents for in camera, ex parte review)
-
Government's Motion to Seal (privilege log)
-
Government's Notice (of privilege log filing)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel (defendants to accept service of process and disclose names of percipient witnesses)
-
Clerk Notes (re: day 4 of trial)
-
Defendants' Motion to Clarify (July 9 Bench Ruling)
-
Exhibit A
-
Clerk's Note (re: day 3 of trial)
-
Government's Motion to Partially Reconsider (the court's order holding the government waived all privileges)
-
Index (relating to the submission of sealed documents)
-
Declaration of John Armstrong (re: deliberative process)
-
Declaration of John Armstrong (re: law enforcement privilege)
-
Declaration of Gary Lawkowski
-
Privilege Log
-
Defendants' Objections to Disclosure of, and Assertions of Privilege Over, Set of In Camera Documents
-
Clerk's Notes (re: day 2 of trial)
-
Clerk's Notes (re: day 1 of trial)
-
Plaintiffs' Unredacted Pretrial Brief
-
Order (denying government's motion to compel)
-
Plaintiffs' Response
-
Exhibit A
-
Government's Notice of Sealed Submission of Documents
-
Government's Motion to Compel (the deposition of Nadje Al-Ali)
-
Exhibit A
-
Plaintiffs' Redacted Pretrial Brief
-
Exhibits
-
Amended Protective Order
-
Order (addendum to earlier pretrial order)
-
Order (denying government's 2d motion to compel)
-
Order (denying plaintiff's motion to compel and anonymous testimony)
-
Plaintiffs' Response
-
Government's 2d Motion to Compel
-
Joint Motion to Revise Protective Order
-
Proposed Order
-
Exhibit A
-
Government's Motion for Leave to File (opposition brief out of time)
-
Government's Opposition
-
Declaration of Ethan Kanter
-
Exhibit A
-
Exhibit B
-
Exhibit C
-
Exhibit D
-
Exhibit E
-
Exhibit F
-
Declaration of John Armstrong (asserting deliberative process privilege)
-
Declaration of William Walker
-
Declaration of Gary Lawkowski
-
Declaration of John Armstrong (asserting law enforcement privilege)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal (portions of pretrial brief)
-
Government's Motion to Seal (exhibit G of government's opposition)
-
Government's Index of Sealed Documents
-
Clerk's Notes (re: pretrial conference)
-
Plaintiffs' Addendum (to motion to compel)
-
Exhibit A
-
Plaintiffs' Opposition
-
Corrected Pretrial Memorandum
-
Plaintiffs' Motion to Permit Remote Testimony
-
Declaration of Noam Biale
-
Exhibit A
-
Exhibit B
-
Exhibit C
-
Plaintiffs' Response
-
Exhibit A
-
Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel (complete answers to interrogatories, production of documents, & disclosure of information improperly withheld as privileged)
-
Exhibit A: Declaration of Scott Wilkens
-
Exhibit 1
-
Exhibit 2
-
Exhibit 3
-
Exhibit 4
-
Exhibit 5
-
Exhibit 6
-
Exhibit 7
-
Exhibit 8
-
Exhibit 9
-
Exhibit 10
-
Exhibit B
-
Government's Motion in Limine (to preclude introduction of evidence)
-
Exhibits A–F
-
Protective Order (re: production of documents and exchange of confidential information)
-
Government's Motion to Reconsider (re: protective order for the exchange of confidential information)
-
Order (granting stipulated clawback agreement)
-
Order (granting motion to seal)
-
Order (granting attorneys' eyes only protective order)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for an Attorney's Eyes Protective Order
-
Order (setting new deadline for pretrial memorandum)
-
Plaintiff's Motion to Seal (re: motion to compel)
-
Joint Motion to Adjourn Deadline (for pretrial memorandum)
-
Order (granting government’s motion for an attorneys’ eyes only protective order)
-
Order (granting motion to compel identities of witnesses)
-
Plaintiffs' Opposition
-
Declaration of Noam Biale
-
Exhibit A
-
Exhibit B
-
Government's Motion for Attorney Eyes Only Protective Order
-
Government's Motion to Compel Identity of Plaintiffs' Witnesses
-
Exhibit 1
-
Exhibit 2
-
Exhibit 3
-
Exhibit 4
-
Government's Response
-
Joint Motion to Enter Stipulation and Proposed Order
-
Proposed Order
-
Plaintiffs' Reply (leave to file granted)
-
Government's Notice of Sealed Submission of Documents
-
Stipulation and Order
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for a Protective Order (for document production and exchange of confidential information)
-
Exhibit A: Proposed Order
-
Joint Motion to Enter Stipulation & Proposed Order
-
Stipulation & Proposed Order
-
Order (re: protective order to limit discovery)
-
Order (re: protective order barring witness retaliation)
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Reply
-
Plaintiffs' Proposed Reply
-
Government's Motion for Leave to File Reply
-
Exhibit A: Government's Proposed Reply
-
Government's Response
-
Plaintiffs' Opposition
-
Declaration of Scott Wilkens
-
Exhibit A
-
Government's Motion for Protective Order (to limit discovery)
-
Exhibit A
-
Exhibit B
-
Exhibit C
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for Protective Order (barring witness retaliation)
-
Exhibit A: Declaration of Xiangnong Wang
-
Exhibit B: Declaration of Noam Biale
-
Exhibit C: Proposed Protective Order
-
Redacted Administrative Record
-
Government's Motion to Provisionally Seal Administrative Record
-
Transcript of Status Conference
-
Plaintiffs' Opposition
-
Government's Motion for a Protective Order
-
Plaintiffs' Letter (re: status of discovery)
-
Transcript of Case Management Conference
-
Order (setting trial date)
-
Opinion
-
Plaintiffs' Reply
-
Declaration of Ramya Krishnan
-
Exhibit A
-
Exhibit B
-
Exhibit C
-
Exhibit D
-
Exhibit E
-
Exhibit F
-
Exhibit G
-
Exhibit H
-
Government's Opposition
-
Declaration of John Armstrong
-
Declaration of Andre Watson
-
Amicus Briefs (in support of plaintiffs)
-
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts & 18 other states
-
Amicus Brief of The Presidents' Alliance
-
Amicus Brief of 30 Academic Associations
-
Plaintiffs' Motion for a Preliminary Injunction
-
Declaration of Ramya Krishnan
-
Exhibits AA–II
-
Exhibits N–Z
-
Exhibits A–M
-
Declaration of Aslı Ü. Bâli
-
Declaration of Veena Dubal
-
Complaint
-
Related News Coverage
-
Trump officials used shadowy website to target pro-Palestinian academics for deportation, court records show
Politico
-
Trial Over Free Speech on Campus, and Trump’s Student Crackdown, Begins
The New York Times
-
Trump admin waffles in court on whether pro-Palestinian foreigners have full First Amendment rights
Politico
-
US academic groups sue White House over planned deportations of pro-Gaza students
The Guardian
-
Professors Sue Trump Administration Over Arrests of Campus Protesters
The New York Times