A federal immigration court has terminated deportation proceedings against a Turkish graduate student whose arrest last spring raised questions about the intersection of campus activism and immigration enforcement.
The court ruled on January 29 that the government failed to meet its burden of proof in seeking to deport Rümeysa Öztürk, a doctoral candidate at Tufts University studying children’s relationship to social media. The decision was disclosed Monday in a filing with the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City, where Öztürk continues to challenge the circumstances of her arrest and detention.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers detained Öztürk on March 25 in Somerville, Massachusetts. A federal judge subsequently ordered her release in May, pending resolution of her habeas corpus petition. According to her legal team, the immigration court rejected a key argument the Trump administration had employed to challenge the immigration status of several students and campus activists who had voiced criticism of Israel during its ongoing conflict with Hamas militants in Gaza.
The Department of Homeland Security responded sharply to the court’s decision, with a spokesperson characterizing it as “judicial activism” and describing Öztürk as a “terrorist sympathizer.”
“Visas provided to foreign students to live, study, and work in the United States are a privilege, not a right,” the spokesperson stated Monday. “And when you advocate for violence, glorify and support terrorists that relish the killing of Americans, and harass Jews, that privilege should be revoked, and you should not be in this country.”
The facts of the case reveal a contentious dispute over the boundaries of protected speech and the conditions under which foreign students may remain in the country. Tufts University indicated in April that Öztürk had co-authored an opinion piece in the student newspaper criticizing the university’s response to the war in Gaza and calling for divestment from ties to Israel. The Trump administration invoked a rarely used provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act in its attempt to remove her from the country.
Immigration court proceedings are generally not public, and the decision in Öztürk’s favor remains filed under seal. Her attorneys have offered to provide the ruling to the appeals court under similar confidential terms.
In a statement released Monday, Öztürk expressed relief at the outcome while acknowledging broader concerns about immigration enforcement. “Today, I breathe a sigh of relief knowing that despite the justice system’s flaws, my case may give hope to those who have also been wronged by the U.S. government,” she said. “Though the pain that I and thousands of other women wrongfully imprisoned by ICE have faced cannot be undone, it is heartening to know that some justice can prevail after all.”
Her legal team emphasized that the termination of removal proceedings does not resolve her habeas corpus petition, which continues before the appeals court. That case challenges the legality of her initial arrest and detention.
The case has drawn attention to the Trump administration’s approach to campus activism related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, particularly its willingness to pursue immigration consequences against foreign students engaged in political speech. The outcome suggests that immigration courts may scrutinize such efforts more carefully than the administration anticipated.
Related: Man Who Fabricated Story of Child’s Death in Gaza Now Seeks Political Office
