On March 25, Turkish postgraduate student Rumesysa Ozturk was arrested by Department of Homeland Security officers before being shipped to the South Louisiana ICE Processing Center in Basile. Her crime: penning an opinion.
Ozturk was detained for co-authoring an op-ed in the Tufts Daily News arguing that the university should divest from Israel. Her case has, justifiably, spurred anxieties that merely expressing views that dissent or oppose from those held by the government can now be considered sufficient grounds for deportation. In a country that has historically prided itself on the right to share one’s opinion without fear of persecution, it is the prerogative of universities and newspapers to protect student journalists and defend freedom of expression and imperative to upholding the values of the United States that news opinions sections remain an open forum.
The community at Tufts, where Ozturk was a doctoral student, has spoken up overwhelmingly in support of Ozturk and the Daily News’s right to freely express their opinion without fear of further penalization. 55 alums wrote an op-ed in support of Ozturk, as did the class of 1989, student group Tufts Friends of Israel, both Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans in a bipartisan statement, and the newspaper’s managing board published a brief reaffirmation of their commitment to the First Amendment. A press freedom coalition, including the Student Press Law Center, Freedom of the Press Foundation, and PEN America, likewise condemned the arrest.
The arrest comes amid a crackdown on the privileges of news organizations and a flurry of fear at student-run publications. The editors of the Columbia Political Review and the Stanford Daily have received a surge in takedown requests. In February, the Trump administration announced that it will determine which news outlets can cover the president; that same month, it barred the Associated Press from covering the White House. These actions signal an alarming trend of restricting the free flow of information and silencing the press—attacks that threaten the foundation of democracy itself.
The role of the opinions section of a newspaper is more important than ever. It is, first and foremost, a place where writers can present their perspective and it is understood to be a personal opinion—something to spark conversation. Open forums, which newspaper opinions sections are often considered as, serve as a platform for public participation, allowing citizens to voice their opinions, concerns and suggestions on matters of public interest. They encourage diverse perspectives, allow a wide variety of voices and viewpoints to be heard, foster public dialogue and encourage civic engagement and have the unique ability to hold the powerful accountable by allowing writers to challenge people in positions of authority, which can aid in calling out inefficiency or injustice.
When a society discourages the exchange of ideas, it becomes susceptible to dogma. Suppressing differing opinions can stifle innovation, creativity and the discovery of new solutions to pressing issues. Most alarmingly, it serves as a symbol of censorship, which could seriously undermine free speech, accountability and human rights.
The United States is made up of a uniquely diverse body. Americans are not bound by blood, or race, or religion, but rather a shared set of ideals exemplified in one unifying document. Americans—new citizens, soldiers, and presidents alike—swear their allegiance to the Constitution. If the free press, protected under the First Amendment of that Constitution, is not a place where free speech is safe, then nowhere is. And that sets a dangerous precedent indeed.
