On March 25, Rumeysa Öztürk, a 30-year-old Turkish graduate student at Tufts University, was arrested by six masked federal agents in plain clothes. Although she possessed a valid F-1 student visa, it had been revoked reportedly without prior notification. Initially detaining her in Massachusetts, the authorities subsequently transferred Öztürk to a remote detention center in Louisiana.
Öztürk’s incident is among several similar cases. Following protests over the conflict in Gaza the previous year, the Trump administration declared an intention to clamp down on “Hamas sympathizers on college campuses.” In recent weeks, ICE agents have escalated actions in college towns across the nation, resulting in student arrests at institutions such as Columbia University, the University of Minnesota, and the University of Alabama.
Daniel Kanstroom, a law professor at Boston College and an expert on immigration policy, noted that the practice of detaining legally residing students appears calculated to “send a message” and instill fear. He remarked that the tactics deployed in Öztürk’s arrest, typically reserved for extreme situations, were unnecessarily severe for a case involving a graduate student.
Kanstroom, founder of the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic and director of the Post-Deportation Human Rights Project, emphasized the importance of respecting human dignity when exercising governmental power to control borders. He highlighted that historically, such episodes in the U.S. inspire significant solidarity and activism, often leading to legal reforms and greater recognition of individual rights.
In another case, Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a Maryland resident, was mistakenly deported to a prison in El Salvador, despite a judge’s order against it. The U.S. government admitted the mistake but claimed helplessness due to his current custody status in El Salvador. Kanstroom contended that such missteps underscore a pattern of intimidation and unnecessary harshness in immigration enforcement. He criticized the potential complexities involved in correcting deportation errors once they occur, due to the difficulty in questioning or challenging deportations post-factum.
Additionally, Kanstroom reflected on the political strategies potentially targeting documented immigrants and expressed concern about the erosion of principles meant to protect individuals with green cards. He warned that such governmental powers, once established, can be challenging to dismantle, drawing parallels with historical legislative measures like the Alien Enemies Act and its broader implications on civil liberties.
Finally, Kanstroom addressed concerns regarding First Amendment rights for non-citizens, explaining that legal precedents suggest the amendment does not exclusively apply to citizens. He advised individuals with green cards to exercise caution while traveling, as recent government actions suggest increased scrutiny of their pasts. Kanstroom’s observations underscore the recurring nature of immigration debates throughout U.S. history, stressing their foundational significance to the country’s identity.