A federal court in the United States has begun hearing a landmark case brought by a group of academics and students who accuse the Trump administration of orchestrating a politically motivated campaign to detain and deport individuals involved in pro-Palestinian advocacy.

The plaintiffs, comprising university faculty, students, and union representatives, argue that the policy targeted international scholars who spoke out against Israeli actions in Gaza, using immigration law as a tool to silence dissent. They claim the measures violated constitutional protections, including the right to free speech, and imposed a climate of fear across academic institutions.

According to court filings, foreign students and professors were intimidated into silence, withdrawing from protests, publications, and even classroom discussions on Palestine. The lawsuit details cases such as that of Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian graduate from Columbia University, who was held in federal detention for over three months, and Rumeisa Ozturk, a student from Tufts University, detained after publishing an article criticising Israeli military actions.

The U.S. government denies the existence of any such policy, describing the plaintiffs’ claims as speculative and unsupported by formal documentation. Yet several academics are expected to testify about the chilling effect they experienced, asserting that immigration enforcement was used selectively to punish political expression related to Palestine.

At the heart of the case is the question of whether the U.S. government used its power to suppress a specific political stance, one that challenges the Israeli narrative and exposes the brutality unfolding in Gaza. For many in the academic community, the lawsuit represents a broader fight: not just for legal accountability, but for the right to speak truth to power without fear of retribution.