🔗 Share this article

After federal agents arrested the university student a student activist in his campus housing, the institute director knew a significant fight was coming.

Jaffer heads a Columbia-affiliated center focused on protecting free speech protections. Khalil, a permanent resident, had been active in pro-Palestinian protests on campus. Previously, Jaffer's organization had organized a symposium about free speech rights for immigrants.

"We felt this connection to the case, because we're at Columbia," Jaffer explained. "We viewed this detention as a major violation of constitutional freedoms."

Major Legal Win Challenging Government

Last week, Jaffer's team at the free speech organization, along with the law firm Sher Tremonte, secured a landmark victory when a district court judge in Massachusetts determined that the detention and planned removal of Khalil and other pro-Palestinian students was illegal and purposely created to suppress protest.

Government officials has said it will appeal the decision, with White House spokesperson a spokeswoman describing the ruling an "unacceptable decision that undermines the safety and security of the country".

Increasing Separation Between Organization and Institution

This decision raised the visibility of the Knight Institute, catapulting it to the frontlines of the battle against Trump over core constitutional principles. Yet the win also highlighted the growing divide between the institute and the institution that hosts it.

The case – characterized by the judge as "perhaps the most important to ever fall within the authority of this district court" – was the first of multiple challenging the administration's unprecedented assault on higher education to go to trial.

Trial Revelations

During the court proceedings, academic experts testified about the atmosphere of fear and silencing ushered in by the arrests, while government agents disclosed information about their dependence on reports by conservative, pro-Israel organizations to select individuals.

Veena Dubal, general counsel of the academic organization, which filed the lawsuit together with local branches and the Middle East Studies Association, described it "the central civil rights lawsuit of the Trump administration this time around".

'University and Institute Are On Different Sides'

While the court victory was praised by supporters and academics across the country, Jaffer received no communication from Columbia after the ruling – an indication of the disagreements in the stances taken by the institute and the institution.

Even before the administration began, Columbia had represented the shrinking space for pro-Palestinian speech on US campuses after it called police to clear its campus protest, suspended multiple activists for their protests and severely limited protests on campus.

Institutional Agreement

Recently, the university negotiated an agreement with the federal government to provide substantial funds to settle discrimination allegations and submit to significant limitations on its independence in a move widely condemned as "capitulation" to the administration's pressure strategies.

The university's submissive approach was sharply contrasted with the organization's principled position.

"This is a moment in which the institution and the organization hold opposing views of these critical questions," observed Joel Simon at the Knight Institute.

Institute's Mission

The Knight Institute was launched in 2016 and is located on the university grounds. It has obtained substantial support from the university as part of an agreement that had each contributing substantial amounts in operating funds and endowment funds to launch it.

"My hope for the organization in the long-term future is that when there is a time when the government has overstepped boundaries and constitutional protections are threatened and few others is prepared to step forward and to say, enough is enough, it will be the this organization that will taken action," said the former president, a constitutional expert who helped create the center.

Public Criticism

Shortly after recent events, Columbia and the Knight Institute found themselves on opposing sides, with Knight regularly criticizing the institution's management of pro-Palestinian protests both privately and in progressively critical public statements.

In one letter to campus administration, the director condemned the action to suspend campus organizations, which the institution said had violated policies concerning holding campus events.

Escalating Tensions

Subsequently, the director again condemned the institution's choice to call police onto campus to clear a non-violent, pro-Palestinian encampment – leading to the detention of more than 100 students.

"Institutional policies have become separated from the values that are essential for the academic community and mission – such as expression, scholarly independence, and equality," he stated in that instance.

Activist Viewpoint

The detained student, in particular, had pleaded with university administrators for support, and in a published article written from detention he wrote that "the reasoning used by the federal government to single out myself and fellow students is a direct extension of Columbia's repression playbook concerning Palestine".

Columbia reached agreement with the Trump administration shortly after the case wrapped in court.

Organization's Reaction

Following the agreement was announced, the organization published a strong criticism, concluding that the agreement approves "an astonishing transfer of independence and control to the administration".

"University administration should not have accepted this," the statement said.

Broader Context

Knight doesn't stand alone – organizations such as the civil liberties union, the free speech organization and additional rights organizations have opposed the government over free speech issues, as have unions and other institutions.

The institute isn't exclusively focusing on university matters – in additional lawsuits to the Trump administration, the organization has filed cases on behalf of agricultural workers and environmental advocates challenging federal departments over environmental datasets and challenged the suppression of official reports.

Unique Position

But its defense of campus expression at a university now synonymous with making concessions on it puts it in a uniquely uneasy situation.

Jaffer showed understanding for the absence of "good options" for Columbia's leaders while he described their decision to settle as a "serious mistake". But he emphasized that despite the institute positioned at the other side of its parent institution when it comes to addressing the president, the institution has permitted it to function without interference.

"Particularly currently, I don't take that freedom for granted," he said. "If Columbia tried to limit our activities, I wouldn't remain at the university any more."