ICE targets Columbia University to target pro-Palestinian students
- Federal immigration authorities initiated an investigation into Columbia University, alleging that the institution was harboring illegal students.
- Two graduate students, Ranjani Srinivasan and Yunseo Chung, were specifically targeted amid ICE's efforts to enforce immigration laws against individuals involved in activism.
- The investigation revealed significant legal and factual inaccuracies within the affidavits submitted by ICE, raising concerns regarding government overreach and the implications for academic freedom.
In March 2021, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) began an investigation into Columbia University, accusing it of harboring illegal aliens within its campus. The investigation was part of broader efforts undertaken by the Trump administration to penalize institutions perceived as supportive of foreign students engaged in activism. Columbia University refused to allow federal agents to search student housing without a signed warrant, leading ICE to seek judicial approval. This culminated in federal agents obtaining search warrants for two students, Ranjani Srinivasan and Yunseo Chung, based on claims that the university was protecting them from deportation. The affidavit filed to obtain the search warrants contained numerous factual inaccuracies, and ICE was criticized for misrepresenting the students’ legal statuses and actions in the context of their protests against U.S. foreign policy. Meanwhile, student activists at Columbia voiced their concerns about the administration’s connection to ICE and how this investigation could have class implications among international students. The case against Chung, a lawful green card holder, drew attention from civil rights advocates as it appeared to come in response to her pro-Palestinian activism on campus, raising alarms about the intersection of immigration enforcement and political dissent. Chung's legal team noted that the evidence used to justify the investigation was fundamentally flawed, suggesting that the legal rationale employed by ICE could set a dangerous precedent for targeting political activism within academic institutions. As the case unfolded in court, advocates worked to protect the students from potential deportation while navigating the complexities of U.S. immigration law under the backdrop of escalating tensions surrounding U.S. foreign policy and immigrant rights in educational spaces. The situation highlighted ongoing debates about academic freedom, the role of federal authorities in university settings, and the experiences of international students in the United States.