U.S. District Judge William Young, a veteran of the federal bench since his appointment by President Ronald Reagan, has once again stepped into the national spotlight with a ruling that challenges the Trump administration’s approach to both free speech and higher education. On October 1, 2025, Young authored a scathing 161-page opinion, declaring that the administration’s efforts to deport and crack down on pro-Palestinian protesters and activists on college campuses were illegal and violated the First Amendment’s free speech protections. This latest decision isn’t Young’s first brush with controversy—nor his first time clashing with President Donald Trump.
According to NBC News, Young’s opinion was not just a legal ruling but a pointed critique. He accused the Trump administration of engaging in “government retribution for speech,” a practice he argued is “directly forbidden by the First Amendment.” The judge’s language was, as ever, uncompromising. He described Trump as a president fixated on “hollow bragging” and “retribution at all costs,” and warned that such conduct poses a serious threat to Americans’ constitutional freedoms.
Young’s concerns are not merely theoretical. The backdrop to his ruling is a wave of pro-Palestinian demonstrations that have swept across American universities over the past year, sparked by the ongoing war in Gaza. According to the Los Angeles Times and Jewish News of Northern California, the White House has ordered investigations by both the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the Department of Education into the California State University (CSU) system, which spans 22 campuses including Fresno State, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Stanislaus State, and Sacramento State. The probes focus on allegations of antisemitism and racial discrimination in faculty job postings and campus life, following complaints that some pro-Palestinian protests have crossed the line into harassment or threats against Jewish faculty and staff.
Some incidents have been serious enough to require law enforcement intervention. For example, a Long Beach State professor needed a police escort to exit a classroom at San José State after anti-Zionist demonstrators made threats. At Cal Poly, two protesters were arrested in June 2024 for spray-painting pro-Palestinian messages inside an administration building. Yet, as Jewish News reports, not all demonstrations have been disruptive. A protest at Fresno State in May 2024 drew about 250 people and remained peaceful, with no injuries or property damage. At Sacramento State, a week-long tent encampment in April 2024 was similarly nonviolent.
The question of whether these protests constitute antisemitism is a matter of ongoing debate. Rabbi Rick Winer of Temple Beth Israel in Fresno told Jewish News that during the May 2024 event at Fresno State, “I did not hear any significant reports of Jewish students, staff or faculty who were inconvenienced or put out by those lifting up their voices for Palestinian rights.” Winer noted that the Jewish student population at Fresno State is small—fewer than a dozen—but the university offers a minor in Jewish studies and, according to Winer, President Saúl Jiménez Sandoval “has been supportive of the Jewish community and every student on campus.” Winer added, “I believe that the CSU system is doing everything they can to assure the safety of the Jewish community as well as all of the students on their campuses.”
Still, the Trump administration’s response has been forceful. The EEOC has initiated complaints, contacting faculty and staff across the CSU system, while the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights investigates alleged racial discrimination. The stakes are high: as Jewish News points out, Columbia University recently settled similar government accusations for $200 million, plus a $21 million EEOC fine. Any penalties imposed on CSU would come at a difficult time—the system faces a $20 billion state budget deficit in 2025, and additional fines could further strain resources.
Judge Young’s rulings have become a flashpoint in this broader conflict over free speech, protest, and the boundaries of government intervention. In June 2025, Young ruled that the Trump administration had illegally slashed funding for National Institutes of Health research grants, describing the cuts as “appalling” and evidence of “racial discrimination” and “discrimination against the LGBTQ community.” “That’s what this is,” Young declared, adding, “Have we no shame?” The Trump administration appealed Young’s injunction, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals allowed his ruling to stand while the case continued. In August, however, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 to lift Young’s injunction, with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh criticizing Young for not following the high court’s emergency guidance from April 2025. “When this Court issues a decision, it constitutes a precedent that commands respect in lower courts,” the justices wrote.
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, expressing sympathy for Young’s position. “Calvinball has only one rule: There are no fixed rules,” she wrote. “We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins.” Young, for his part, apologized for any procedural missteps but remained steadfast in his critique of Trump’s disregard for free speech. In his October 1, 2025, opinion, Young warned, “I fear President Trump believes the American people are so divided that today they will not stand up, fight for, and defend our most precious constitutional values so long as they are lulled into thinking their own personal interests are not affected. Is he correct?”
The broader context is fraught. After the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, which killed 1,200 Israelis and saw 240 kidnapped, Israel launched a military campaign in Gaza that, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, has left more than 65,000 Palestinians dead. The violence has rippled across American campuses, fueling protests and counter-protests, and leaving university administrators caught between competing demands to protect free speech and ensure campus safety.
As the investigations into CSU proceed, many are calling for a careful, balanced approach. The Jewish News editorial warned, “The investigations into the CSU need to be factual, honest and professional. Partisanship must be kept out. Otherwise, it will be just another retribution exercise by Trump, and that would cheapen any reforms identified by the federal agencies.”
Judge Young’s voice, critical yet measured, has become emblematic of a broader struggle over the meaning of free speech and the role of government in policing it. Whether his opinions will ultimately sway policy or public opinion remains to be seen. But as the legal and political battles continue, one thing is clear: the nation’s campuses—and its courts—remain at the center of America’s most contentious debates.