After the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression sued U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio Aug. 16 for violating First Amendment rights on behalf of The Stanford Daily, student news publications across the country took action. 

The Student Press Law Center, College Media Association, the Associated Collegiate Press and more than 50 student news publications filed an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs, which also includes two anonymous legal noncitizens Oct. 15. 

According to FIRE’s Aug. 16 press release, the lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. These provisions allow Rubio to initiate deportation hearings of noncitizens if he “personally determines” the speech to be a national security threat and revoke visas “at any time” for any reason. 

The lawsuit and brief allege the federal government’s immigration policies have created a “chilling effect,” where noncitizens and international students are terrified to voice their opinions, as described in SPLC’s Oct. 15 press release. 

Matthew Cate, a member of the Student Press Law Center’s Board of Directors, filed the brief. In a statement to The Daily Free Press, Cate wrote that student newsrooms across the country began feeling these “chilling effects” after the arrest of Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish graduate student at Tufts University.

After authoring an op-ed in the Tufts Daily criticizing Israel’s bombardment of Gaza, Öztürk had her visa revoked, was forced into a van by masked agents and sent to a detention center in Louisiana.

“It is important to support The Stanford Daily’s effort to stop the government from punishing or threatening to punish speech by international students that this administration doesn’t like,” Cate wrote. 

The managing board of Tufts Daily wrote they “watched and reported on the detainment” of one of their own peers, in a statement to The Daily Free Press. 

“We felt that The Stanford Daily’s lawsuit would help prevent that from happening to anyone else on our campus or at any university,” the statement reads. 

The Huntington News, Northeastern University’s independent student newspaper, was among the 55 student publications that signed the brief. Editor in Chief Emily Spatz said Huntington’s student journalists have faced similar issues the Stanford Daily experienced, including students asking to have contributions and attributions removed from past articles.

Spatz said international students are now reluctant to speak to The Huntington. Several international students have also asked for their opinion pieces to be removed from the publication, Spatz said, taking away “a vital perspective” from the newspaper’s coverage.

“This lawsuit is taking a stand for First Amendment rights of both our writers and our sources,” she said. “We just want to drive home the point that it is affecting student journalism across the country.”

Editor in Chief Elijah Horwath outlined how the growing culture of fear has impacted University of Massachusetts Boston’s newspaper Mass Media.

“We had someone call our phone line crying, worried that they would get their visa revoked because they were in the process of solidifying their citizenship, and they were worried that being attached to an op-ed would hurt their chances,” Horwath said.

While few publications have seen their own writers detained, many have experienced the detriments of federal attacks on free speech. 

“[It’s] chilling to think about how many perspectives we’re losing from the record as more and more international students feel less and less safe to add their voices,” Horwath said.

Dylan Hembrough, editor in chief of The Alestle, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville’s student newspaper, described a first-hand experience of this chilling effect. 

After a handful of students at SIUE had their visas revoked and eventually reinstated in April, The Alestle attempted to cover the revocations, offering anonymity to students, but no one was willing to speak.

While some student publications that signed the brief worry about becoming a potential target of the Trump administration, they decided defending student journalism superseded their fears of federal retaliation. 

“We’re standing up for the values we believe in,” said Kevin Lieue, co-editor in chief of The College Voice, Connecticut College’s student publication. “So, if that makes us a target … that’s just a decision that we’re totally understanding of and willing to stand up for.”

Hembrough said it was a “critical time” to fight for free speech, despite potential pushback from the federal government.

“It’s even more important for student journalists to be making a stand right now, because it would be easier to silence us,” Horwath said, comparing student publications to national news outlets. 

Cate wrote he does not believe “retaliation is beneath the administration.”

“I’m more worried generally about the administration’s overall attack on what it characterizes as ‘anti-American’ speech that it disagrees with,” he wrote. “I am frequently in awe of the work and courage of the student press. It is worth fighting for.” 

Dylan Winward, editor in chief of The Bruin, the University of California Los Angeles’ student publication, said they signed the brief “purely to protect the right to free speech guaranteed by the First Amendment.”

“We’re not making a general condemnation of all instances of deportation in the United States,” Winward said. “In fact, we’re not referencing any specific cases of deportation or opining on federal government policy as a whole.”

Looking ahead, Andrea Lewis, president of the College Media Association, wrote in a statement to The Daily Free Press that she hopes the courts will uphold the same free speech values they historically always have. 

“This case is about more than one lawsuit; it is about whether the First Amendment remains a living promise,” she wrote. “It is a reminder of why journalism education matters. When students learn to report freely and think critically, democracy is stronger for it.” 

Cate wrote that, regardless of the lawsuit’s results, he is optimistic this case will show the importance of taking action.

“I’m hopeful that this case, and the many others pushing back against the administration’s attack on fundamental rights and systems, will encourage others to recognize that rights don’t defend themselves,” he wrote. “We have to stand up and fight for them.”