January 20, 2026


Federal Judge Accuses Trump Administration of First Amendment Violations; DOJ Responds With Indifference

In a heated courtroom exchange last week, U.S. District Judge William Young, appointed by Ronald Reagan and now aged 84, openly criticized the Trump administration for what he described as a conspiracy against the First Amendment. The case in question involves five academic organizations representing international students who supported Palestine. These students claim the administration targeted their immigration status in retaliation for their protests.

Judge Young did not mince words during the hearing, calling President Trump an "authoritarian" and accusing his administration of excluding anyone who disagrees with their policies. He went further to criticize Cabinet members, including Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, for failing to uphold their constitutional duties. "The conduct I've seen from these high-level government officers compels me to find a conspiracy to infringe upon First Amendment rights here in the United States," declared Judge Young.

This is not the first time Judge Young has expressed severe disapproval of the Trump administration’s actions in his courtroom. He previously compared some of the administration's tactics to those used by the Ku Klux Klan, highlighting the severity of his concerns about their approach to governance and law enforcement.

In a surprising twist during the proceedings, a Department of Justice attorney, Paul Stone, argued that the court was powerless to remedy the situation, a stance that seemed to only fuel Judge Young's frustrations. "You’re telling me there is no remedy!?" he responded, incredulous at the suggestion that the judiciary could not intervene.

As the legal community and public await Judge Young's final ruling, expected later this week, the implications of his findings and the government's defiant stance could echo far beyond the walls of the courtroom. The outcome will not only impact the students involved but also set a significant precedent regarding the extent of executive power and constitutional rights under this administration.