The arrest of Tufts University doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk by the Trump administration in March 2025 sparked outrage after video surfaced appearing to display her abduction by masked men. Öztürk was jailed for 45 days and the administration sought to deport her, alleging support for terrorism, Hamas, or antisemitism.
A Case Built on an Op-Ed
The basis for Öztürk’s ordeal, it was later revealed, was an op-ed she co-authored in the Tufts Daily, expressing opinions about Israel’s war on Gaza. The op-ed did not mention Hamas, terrorism, or Jewish people. However, it led to Öztürk, an F-1 student visa holder, being listed on the website Canary Mission, which maintains a blacklist of individuals voicing pro-Palestine views. Court transcripts indicate the government has used this site to identify individuals for deportation based on their constitutionally protected speech.
A Dismissed Case, For Now
This week, a judge dismissed the deportation case against Öztürk, though the government retains the option to challenge that decision. This outcome wasn’t due to the legal system functioning as intended, but rather the impact of disclosures from courageous whistleblowers that discredited the administration’s claims.
Leaked Memos Reveal Deliberate Targeting
Leaked State Department memos reported by the Washington Post in April 2025 revealed that, days before Öztürk’s arrest, the administration “had not produced any evidence” linking her to terrorist organizations or antisemitic activities. A second memo recommended revoking her visa despite this lack of evidence, citing her co-authorship of the op-ed as “anti-Israel activism.” These memos demonstrated a deliberate decision to arrest Öztürk despite knowing there was no legitimate basis for the action.
Following the arrest, which garnered significant media attention, the Department of Homeland Security claimed Öztürk “engaged in activities in support of Hamas” without providing specifics. Secretary of State Marco Rubio also made unsubstantiated claims, suggesting Öztürk was involved in activities like “vandalizing universities” and creating “a ruckus” on campus.
The Fight for Transparency
The Freedom of the Press Foundation, where I work, filed Freedom of Information Act requests for the State Department memos. The agency initially ignored these requests, prompting a lawsuit. Despite winning the release of one document through a separate lawsuit, the agency continues to “stonewall” further disclosures. The State Department claims transparency would violate unspecified “privacy interests” and reveal law enforcement techniques.
The administration has also escalated its attacks on leakers, labeling them “national security threats” and seeking to restrict the press. This comes as the administration seeks to expand ICE abuses and demonize whistleblowers.
Leaks as a Check on Power
Recent leaks have revealed alarming details about immigration enforcement, including ICE’s instruction to enter homes without warrants and its use of Canary Mission to label protestors as “domestic terrorists.” These disclosures, despite attempts to suppress them, are crucial for holding the government accountable.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the sole basis for the attempt to deport Rümeysa Öztürk?
The sole basis for the attempt to deport Öztürk was an op-ed she co-authored in the Tufts Daily, which expressed opinions about Israel’s war on Gaza.
What is Canary Mission?
Canary Mission is a website that maintains a blacklist of activists, writers, and individuals who have voiced pro-Palestine views. The government has reportedly used this site to identify people for deportation.
Did the government have evidence linking Öztürk to terrorism?
According to leaked State Department memos, the administration “had not produced any evidence” linking Öztürk to terrorist organizations or antisemitic activities.
As this case demonstrates, what happens when a government prioritizes silencing dissent over upholding constitutional rights?
