+In a development as disturbing as it is emblematic of our times, a Tufts University graduate student was detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement following writing an op-ed with three other students last spring. This piece was published in The Tufts Daily, the independent student newspaper of the university, and called for the institution to divest from companies tied to the country of Israel, a message echoed by many college students across the United States. The circumstances surrounding the deportation remain shrouded in bureaucratic ambiguity, but the message resounds with startling clarity: For student journalists, the cost of exercising one’s First Amendment rights may now include the threat of state-sanctioned retribution.

This episode, though at this point singular in its details, is symptomatic of a broader and deeply troubling phenomenon. College campuses, long heralded as bastions of intellectual inquiry and unflinching discourse, are increasingly vulnerable to the encroachment of political agendas and reactionary policies. The fact that a student could be swept into the machinery of immigration enforcement not for a criminal act, but seemingly for voicing an opinion, evokes a climate more reminiscent of authoritarianism than democracy.

Journalism is a cornerstone of a functioning democracy. It is through fearless reporting and critical analysis that societies interrogate power, hold institutions accountable and ultimately elevate the voices of the marginalized. Student journalism in particular, serves as a training ground for civic engagement and a crucible for ethical inquiry. It is where tomorrow’s investigative reporters and public intellectuals are forged. To silence student voices is to interrupt that democratic continuum — to deprive the public not only of truth, but of the next generation of truth-tellers.

The chilling effect this creates is not hypothetical — it is immediate and palpable. Across the country, student journalists are beginning to think twice, not merely out of deference to institutional norms or editorial rigor, but out of a visceral fear of personal, potentially life-long consequences. The specter of surveillance, of targeted retaliation, now hovers over student newsrooms, stifling the very freedoms our Constitution was designed to protect.

This is more than an isolated miscarriage of justice. It is a calculated act of intimidation, one that weaponizes immigration enforcement as a tool to suppress dissent. In doing so, it undermines not only the principles of a free press but also the integrity of our democratic experiment. The editorial page should be a space for fearless critique and principled conviction, not a battlefield where students must wager their safety against their conscience.

This editorial board also wants to speak directly to the students who are watching this unfold with understandable fear. We see you. We stand with you. We know how isolating and frightening it must feel to watch peers face retaliation for speaking out, and we reject any system that forces students to choose between personal safety and freedom of expression. The burden should not be on young people to remain silent in order to remain safe. It is on the rest of us to ensure that their voices are protected.

Universities have a moral obligation to safeguard the rights of their students, especially those most vulnerable to the caprices of political power. To equivocate, to retreat into bureaucratic deflection or legalese, is to abdicate that responsibility. When institutions fail to defend free expression, they enable its erosion.

It is time for those of us who believe in the sanctity of the student press to speak plainly and act decisively. To stand with those whose voices are being threatened. To demand transparency, accountability and protection — not just for this Tufts student, but for every young journalist who dares to speak truth to power.

If we allow fear to dictate who gets to write, who gets to publish and who gets to participate in public discourse, then we have already begun the slow descent into intellectual authoritarianism. In this moment, silence is not neutrality — it is complicity.

Let this be a call to action, not just for students, but for faculty, administrators, and citizens alike: We must reaffirm our commitment to the First Amendment, not in theory, but in practice. The freedom of the press, especially the student press, must not become collateral damage in the battles of an increasingly politicized immigration regime. The stakes are too high. The precedent, too dangerous.