Stanford newspaper sues over deportation fears of noncitizen writers

SAN JOSE, Calif. (CN) — The Stanford University student newspaper sued the Trump administration Wednesday claiming noncitizen, lawful residents declined writing about certain topics over fears they’ll be deported for their views.

The Stanford Daily Publishing Corporation and two unnamed students say they fear U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will revoke student visas over coverage of the conflict in Gaza. They’ve opted against covering pro-Palestinian protests at the Bay Area university and have asked for the removal of stories they’ve written about the subject, fearing the administration would deem them anti-American or anti-Israel.

“Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Trump administration are trying to turn the inalienable human right of free speech into a privilege contingent upon the whims of a federal bureaucrat, triggering deportation proceedings against noncitizens residing lawfully in this country for their protected political speech regarding American and Israeli foreign policy,” the plaintiffs say in their complaint.

They claim Rubio and the administration use two aspects of the Immigration and Nationality Act to justify censoring lawful noncitizens in the country. One allows Rubio to deport a noncitizen if he determines their lawful beliefs, statements or associations could have serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States. The other gives Rubio the discretion to revoke a visa at any time.

The paper and students ask a judge to find that the First Amendment prohibits the Trump administration from deporting plaintiffs for using protected speech, and issue preliminary and permanent injunctions stopping those removals.

The plaintiffs point to statements made by President Donald Trump and allies before and after the November 2024 election as reason for an injunction.

In October 2023, Trump — then a presidential candidate — said he’d revoke the visas of foreign students deemed radical, anti-American and antisemitic. It wasn’t the only time he made such comments.

“On May 14, 2024, Mr. Trump said at a campaign event, ‘One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country,’” the plaintiffs say in the complaint. “’You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave.’”

Days after taking office in January, the Trump administration issued a fact sheet stating that noncitizens in the country who had joined “pro-jihadist protests” would be deported and Hamas sympathizers on college campuses would face the loss of their visas.

The plaintiffs point to the high-profile case of Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia University graduate student, as proof the Trump administration followed through on its promises.

Actively demonstrating against Israel’s actions in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack, Khalil criticized Israel and what he saw as his university’s financing of its military operations. U.S. Department of Homeland Security agents arrested him in March and started deportation proceedings.

According to the plaintiffs, Rubio personally decided that Khalil’s presence in the country would have negative foreign policy effects, as he’d participated in “antisemitic protests and disruptive activities.”

After a monthslong legal struggle, Khalil has since been released on bond. But his example has affected Stanford’s legal, noncitizen population.

“In March 2025, a lawfully present noncitizen editor on staff decided to quit Stanford Daily because of the student’s nonimmigrant visa status,” the plaintiffs say in their complaint. “Fearing visa revocation, arrest, and deportation for association with articles about Israel or Palestine, the student decided to leave the newspaper.”

Conor Fitzpatrick, an attorney with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which represents the plaintiffs, blasted the Trump administration in a statement.

“In the United States of America, no one should fear a midnight knock on the door for voicing the wrong opinion,” Fitzpatrick said. “Free speech isn’t a privilege the government hands out. Under our Constitution it is the inalienable right of every man, woman, and child.”

Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin called the suit baseless and political.

“DHS doesn’t arrest people based on protected speech, so the plaintiffs’ premise is incorrect,” she said in a statement. “DHS takes its role in removing threats to the public and our communities seriously, and the idea that enforcing federal law in that regard constitutes some kind of prior restraint on speech is laughable.”

A senior State Department official said the agency doesn’t comment on ongoing litigation.