Editor’s note: For security reasons, the University Press omitted the writer’s name and the article title to avoid creating a digital trail that could identify the writer.

The University Press, Florida Atlantic’s student newspaper, often finds its inbox filled with inquiries to pull stories or redact names from published articles. Editors typically say “no” after consideration, unless a piece contains factual errors or poses a risk of direct harm. 

Last semester, an international student requested that the University Press remove their name from a story they had written about a Palestinian issue on campus, fearing the article could jeopardize their immigration status. The request posed a dilemma: removing a byline from published work without transparency can erode readers’ trust and, in some cases, raise legal concerns. In the end, we decided in a heartbeat. The choice involved more than editorial policy, but it reflected a moral responsibility to protect one of our writers.

This editorial decision brings light to the tough questions that student newsrooms across the country now face. They must consider the real risks international students take when publishing, especially on politically sensitive topics. How can they continue reporting on campus events without putting contributors at risk? 

The University Press chose not to identify the writer or mention the article’s title to protect their identity amid increased scrutiny of international students. The student’s immigration attorney warned that the story, even though ethically and fairly reported, could trigger red flags in government vetting through keyword searches like “Palestine.” The attorney advised the student to be cautious online and keep a low profile. 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security announced on April 9 that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will begin reviewing noncitizens’ public social media activity for signs of antisemitic behavior, including support for terrorist organizations. On June 18, the U.S. State Department said student and visiting scholar visa applicants must make their social media accounts public for review as part of the screening process. The department warned that refusing to do so could negatively affect visa approval.

“A U.S. visa is a privilege, not a right. We use all available information in our visa screening and vetting to identify visa applicants who are inadmissible to the United States, including those who pose a threat to U.S. national security,” the department stated in the announcement.

The student came to the United States from their home country to study journalism at Florida Atlantic University and joined the student newspaper to gain hands-on experience in media. In their eyes, removing their name from a sensitive story following the government’s recent crackdown on pro-Palestine speech was not an act of censorship, but a way to protect themselves and their family. “No story or topic is worth your life or the life you want,” they said.

The U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protects both citizens and non-citizens, including international students on visas, by guaranteeing freedom of speech and safeguarding the press from government interference. In the context of this case, Mike Hiestand, senior legal counsel at the Student Press Law Center, told the University Press that it exemplifies a “chilling effect” on student journalists, who are tasked with reporting the truth. 

Hiestand said he usually advises student journalists to hold those in power accountable, but noted that the landscape has shifted beneath their feet under Donald Trump’s administration, which has enforced stricter immigration policies. “That’s not freedom of the press; that’s more like fear of the press,” Hiestand explained, warning that holding the government accountable could put international students on visas at risk of losing their ability to stay in the country.

“Journalists, we like to think of ourselves, and I believe rightly so, as providing the first rough draft of history, and you never want to go in and just rearrange history all willy-nilly,” said Hiestand, referring to the problems of news publication redacting stories or removing names. But he said these students on visas must throw that out the back window.

National student media organizations, along with the Student Press Law Center, issued an alert on April 4 warning about threats to student speech posed by recent immigration enforcement actions on campuses across the country. The alert urges student media leaders to review policies on takedown requests and anonymous sources, especially for students whose immigration status could make them vulnerable.

The alert follows the case of Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish doctoral student at Tufts University, who federal authorities detained on March 25 and whose visa was revoked after she co-authored a student newspaper op-ed critical of Israel. She spent several weeks in custody before being released on bail in May. A federal judge later ruled that her detention violated her First Amendment rights, raising concerns that international students may face targeting for their political speech, according to an Associated Press article.

Mahsa Khanbabai, a Massachusetts-based immigration attorney who has advised many international students, including Öztürk, told the University Press that these actions provide the government with another means to suppress free speech and intimidate small populations, such as international students on visas, during what she called “unprecedented” times.

“The best way to control a population is to have people give up their rights by making it too difficult to ask for their rights,” Khanbabai said. “When you stop exercising those muscles related to legal systems like due process, those muscles become weak. People just forget about them and don’t use them.”

Recent cases show that international students face direct consequences for their political speech. One example is Mahmoud Khalil, a Palestinian graduate student at Columbia University in New York, who ICE detained in March after he participated in pro-Palestinian campus protests. In June, a federal judge ruled that his detention likely violated his First Amendment rights, according to another Associated Press article.

U.S. District Judge William Young ruled on Sept. 30 that the Trump administration acted unconstitutionally in attempting to detain and deport international students and scholars involved in pro-Palestinian activism. The court said these “ideological deportations” violated the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act and described the policy as arbitrary and unjustified, according to the Associated Press article.

At Stanford University, the Stanford Daily reported growing concerns among international students about speaking to the student newspaper. On Aug. 6, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a nonprofit organization, filed a federal lawsuit against Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem on behalf of the newspaper.

FIRE challenged provisions in the Immigration and Nationality Act that allow the government to revoke visas or deport noncitizens for protected speech, arguing the provisions violate the First and Fifth Amendments. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

“FIRE believes the First Amendment protects noncitizens. The government disagrees, and we are litigating this in the courts,” wrote the FIRE Student Press Program Officer Dominic Coletti in a statement to the University Press. “Editorially independent student newspapers have the right to make decisions about reporting, including publishing anonymously.”

The question is what comes next as we navigate these turbulent waters. Will the government retaliate against international students for publicly expressing political opinions or taking positions on issues it opposes, potentially suppressing their First Amendment rights?