January 15, 2026
Judge accuses Rubio and Noem of unconstitutional conspiracy
Judge finds Rubio and Noem targeted students for protected speech
January 15, 2026
Judge finds Rubio and Noem targeted students for protected speech
On Jan. 15, 2026, U.S. District Judge William Young held a hearing in Boston federal court to determine remedies for the Trump administration's detention and deportation campaign against international students engaged in pro-Palestinian activism. Young, an 85-year-old Reagan appointee in his 47th year on the bench, accused Secretary of State
Marco Rubio and Homeland Security Secretary
Kristi Noem of conspiring to violate the First Amendment. The judge's hearing followed his Sep. 2025 ruling that found the administration had unlawfully targeted noncitizen students for their protected political speech.
"There was no policy here. What happened here is an unconstitutional conspiracy to pick off certain people, to twist the laws," Young stated during the hearing. He continued, "Two cabinet secretaries conspired … they intentionally, knowing what they were doing, counseled by professionals who cautioned them, nevertheless went ahead to pick off these people with the intention that your clients would be chilled. And did so rather effectively, by the way." The judge emphasized that both Rubio and Noem had been warned by government professionals but proceeded anyway with the campaign to target students.
The case centers on five noncitizen students and scholars arrested beginning in Mar. 2025: Mahmoud Khalil, Yunseo Chung, and Mohsen Mahdawi from Columbia University; Rumeysa Ozturk from Tufts University; and Badar Khan Suri from Georgetown University. All were detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement based on their pro-Palestinian activism on campus, despite not being accused of any crimes. Chung obtained a restraining order before ICE could arrest her, while the other four were held in ICE detention facilities—sometimes hundreds of miles from their universities—for weeks before federal judges ordered their release.
Evidence presented at the hearing revealed the administration redirected personnel who typically analyze transnational criminal networks to instead compile reports on students involved in pro-Palestinian protests. These reports drew heavily from Canary Mission, an opaque pro-Israel organization that maintains profiles of activists it claims promote hostility toward the U.S., Israel, and Jews. Rubio claimed the students' presence in the country undermined foreign policy interests to prevent antisemitism, and he stated he "proudly" revoked hundreds of student visas over campus activism.
Young proposed a remedy requiring the Trump administration to answer in court before attempting to deport any member of the American Association of University Professors or the Middle East Studies Association. Under his proposal, any adverse immigration enforcement against these groups would be presumed retaliation, and the government would need to demonstrate that reasons other than protected speech justified the removal. The judge said he expects to issue his final remedies ruling on Jan. 22, 2026.
"The big problem in this case is that the cabinet secretaries and, ostensibly, the president of the United States are not honoring the First Amendment," Young declared. He characterized Trump as an "authoritarian" who believes "when he speaks, everyone, everyone, in Article II, is going to toe the line absolutely." The judge added that "the record in this case convinces me that these high officials, and I include the President of the United States, have a fearful view of freedom. A view that defines the freedom here in the United States by who's excluded."
On Jan. 15, 2026, a Philadelphia appellate court overturned a lower-court ruling in Khalil's case on jurisdictional grounds, potentially allowing the Trump administration to continue pursuing his deportation despite Judge Young's findings. The administration's campaign also included examining social media accounts of foreign citizens applying for student visas to check for criticism of Trump's administration, and citing accusations of antisemitism to justify withholding billions in federal funds from universities including Columbia, Harvard, and Penn. Spokespersons for the White House, Rubio, and Noem didn't respond to requests for comment, though DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin previously called Young a "craven" judge who was "smearing and demonizing federal law enforcement."
Who appointed Judge William Young to the federal bench?
How did Young rule that noncitizens lawfully in the U.S. don't have First Amendment rights.
How many witnesses testified during the July 2025 AAUP v. Rubio trial?
How many new profiles did Canary Mission post after Oct. 7, 2023?
How many days did Mahmoud Khalil spend in ICE detention?
Upgrade to Premium to access all practice questions and unlock advanced quiz features.
Upgrade to PremiumThese questions are part of the Judge accuses Rubio and Noem of unconstitutional conspiracy topic. Master this topic by completing the quiz or exploring each question in detail.
Take the full quiz to master this topic and track your progress.
Start QuizU.S. District Judge for the District of Massachusetts
U.S. Secretary of State
U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security
Columbia University student
Turkish doctoral student at Tufts University
Columbia University student