- 'The fact that that could happen or will happen is chilling speech right now, across not just non-citizens but for citizens, because these executive orders don’t just contemplate deportation, they contemplate prosecution,' Godshall-Bennett tells Anadolu
ISTANBUL
Rights advocates say First Amendment protections are under serious threat in the US as pro-Palestinian activists face deportation and prosecution for their political views.
A civil rights group has filed what it calls a “historic” lawsuit challenging two executive orders that critics argue stifle free speech and activism, particularly of Palestinian voices in the US.
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), along with co-counsel, last week filed the lawsuit against two executive orders signed by President Donald Trump that rights advocates say threaten foundational protections enshrined in the US Constitution.
“The lawsuit is seeking a temporary restraining order, a nationwide injunction against the enforcement of the two executive orders to the extent that they authorize enforcement of various punitive measures like deportation or prosecution of individuals, either citizens or lawfully present non-citizens on the basis of their protected speech,” said Chris Godshall-Bennett, ADC’s legal director.
With the lawsuit hearing set for Wednesday, Godshall-Bennett believes the lawsuit is historic because the executive orders contemplate an unprecedented broad proscription on traditionally protected speech.
“They include prohibitions on criticizing the government, criticizing American culture...and of course, are particularly aimed at sort of eradicating dissent around US policy towards Palestine, and the actions of the government of the state of Israel,” he told Anadolu in a video interview.
‘If you can’t criticize the government, free speech has no meaning’
The civil rights advocate noted that while the US government’s animus towards Palestinians and their allies is not new, these orders represent a significant escalation. “This is a categorically new threat to activists and just folks in general who stand in solidarity with Palestinians and also just anyone who contemplates, criticizing the government or the United States in any way.”
ADC’s lawsuit centers on three Cornell University plaintiffs — two graduate students and a professor — whose constitutionally protected speech is under direct threat, according to details on the organization’s website.
The complainants include Momodou Taal, a 31-year-old British-Gambian national and PhD student at Cornell’s Africana Studies and Research Center; Mukoma Wa Ngugi, 54, a US citizen, novelist, poet, and professor in the Department of Literatures in English; and 24-year-old American citizen Sriram Parasurama, a PhD student in the School of Integrative Plant Science.
“Our plaintiffs are folks who are representative of the chilling effect that these executive orders have had on folks who are now sort of experiencing fundamentally fear that they will be punished because they engage in speech that is based on their conscience, and their sort of moral compass to criticize what they see as fundamental injustices in the United States and abroad,” Godshall-Bennett explained.
The student Momodou “has very reasonable and legitimate fear of enforcement action because of the targeting that he’s experienced personally by third-party actors that have called for his deportation … He’s come up in hearings at Congress, so he’s been very prominent in the movement,” he added.
Godshall-Bennett believes that the prohibitions contemplated by the administration’s Executive Orders Numbers 14161 Protecting the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats and 14161 Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism represent a fundamental challenge to the entire First Amendment free speech regime in the US.
“I think it is the most fundamental violation of the First Amendment to say you’re going to arrest a bunch of people who said something you don’t like. I can’t really think of a more fundamental violation of the First Amendment,” he said.
The legal expert termed the orders as unprecedented in terms of the types of speech they seek to punish. “I think the lawsuit is appropriately conceptualized as this fundamental effort to defend the rights of people, to do the thing that is most basic in terms of constitutional protections which is the right to criticize the government."
“It’s the right upon which all other rights are based. If you can’t criticize the government, then free speech has no meaning.”
Government trying to determine 'what you can and cannot say'
ADC’s lawsuit comes at a time when an ongoing crackdown on Palestinian rights activism in the US is intensifying. On March 8, Mahmoud Khalil, a green card holder and student leader at Columbia University, was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Trump commented on The White House X account: “This is the first arrest of many to come.”
“We’ve seen already the enforcement begin in in the last couple weeks … the case of Mahmoud Khalil at Columbia in New York is exactly the thing that everyone’s afraid of. A green card holder, a permanent resident of the United States, not charged with any crime,” Godshall-Bennett said.
He pointed out that Khalil was not accused of engaging in any kind of unlawful activity. His arrest stemmed from the views of the administration on “what you can and cannot say.”
“That is fundamentally inconsistent with the First Amendment, and the whole constitutional regime,” explained Godshall-Bennett.
“That’s one example. We have seen visas canceled at ports of entry based on folks’ proximity to or even just association with Palestine, or the solidarity movement,” he continued. “They have stated in no uncertain terms that their goal is to remove all non-citizens who have engaged in protest.”
“The threat of deportation and prosecution will continue to chill speech that would otherwise occur. It is an attempt to prevent protest at its very core.”
'It’s happening to all of us'
Godshall-Bennett highlighted that the US administration’s focus is specifically on Palestine solidarity activism. “The second executive order regarding anti-Semitism is very clearly targeting Palestine solidarity, in particular, using the pretext of fighting anti-Semitism. The first executive order, the national security one, which is broader, I think it has the same use and is also being used to target Palestine solidarity activists.”
However, the legal expert fears that the threats will not stop there. “The language of the order is extremely broad, and cannot be — there’s no reason to expect it to be limited to Palestine solidarity language. We’re talking about prohibitions on critiques of the government, the administration, culture.”
“The fact that that could happen or will happen is chilling speech right now, across not just non-citizens but for citizens, because these executive orders don’t just contemplate deportation, they contemplate prosecution.”
“This is really an assault on fundamental constitutional principles that are,” Godshall-Bennett warned. “People shouldn’t rest easy thinking that this is happening to someone else. It’s not. It’s happening to all of us.”
“It threatens all of our rights … People should take that very seriously, and really think about what it would mean if we go down this road, and what that means for them personally in terms of their own activism, their own opinions, their own place in a society where those fundamental protections are under threat.”
