In March 2025, a Tufts University doctoral student from Turkey had her visa stripped away after constructing an opinion piece critical of her university’s position on the war in Gaza. The administration’s argument is that a visa is a privilege, not a right, and that non-citizens do not enjoy the same First Amendment protections as Americans. This view is flawed; it misunderstands the nature of a student visa and the values America claims to uphold.
Legally, the F-1 student visa frames its recipient as no more than a temporary visitor. Federal standards state that students have to maintain a foreign residence they have no intention of abandoning. This suggests someone visiting, not putting down roots. But the reality of a doctoral program tells a different story. Graduate students can spend around seven years on American campuses. They teach undergraduates, conduct research, serve on committees, and become key parts of their university communities. They do not come to America to visit attractions. They come with the intent of changing the world.
Starting in elementary school every kid is taught that America is a ‘melting pot’. A nation where people from all walks of life are invited to become part of a shared civic life. The melting pot assumes that newcomers will engage, debate, and contribute their voices to the national conversation. A student who writes an op-ed in the school newspaper is doing exactly that. She is acting like a citizen in every meaningful sense, even if her passport says otherwise. So when the government punishes her for speaking, it sends a contradictory message: “We want you to join our community, but only if you lose your voice.” They strive to strip them of any authentic thought.
There is a deeper constitutional principle at play. The First Amendment does not say “citizens” have freedom of speech. It says “the people” do. Courts have long recognized that non-citizens within the United States are among “the people” entitled to constitutional protections. Federal judges have already pushed back on the administration’s position. In a similar case regarding a revoked student visa, a judge ruled that the government likely acted in a “viewpoint-discriminatory way to chill protected speech.” Another judge, appointed by President Reagan, deduced that the administration’s choice violated the First Amendment. This matters because of what the Supreme Court has repeatedly said about laws that target specific beliefs. In cases involving religious freedom, the Court has ruled that the government cannot single out particular viewpoints for punishment. If the government only revokes visas from students who speak out on one side of the Gaza conflict, while leaving students with opposing views untouched, that is in no way neutral enforcement.
The government is correct in saying that a visa is a privilege. No one has a right to study in the United States. But once a person is here, the Constitution follows. The government cannot condition a privilege on giving up a constitutional right. It is inherently flawed, similar to a town stating “Usage of the public park is permitted as long as the individual does not criticize the mayor. “ The Supreme Court has struck down such conditions before.
America invites students from around the world to join its universities. It asks them to engage, to learn, and to contribute. When they do that, either by joining a debate or composing an op-ed, the government punishes them. A student visa may call its holder a visitor, but the Constitution treats them as a person. That protection should not depend on which side of a political argument they stand on.
Prithika Venugopal is a 12th grader at Rocky Hill High School
Connecticut Foundation for Open Governement high school essay contest
Each year, the Connecticut Foundation for Open Government sponsors an essay contest open to all high-school students in the state. The contest focuses on First Amendment and open information issues. This year, students chose from three prompts (edited here for space constraints): 1.) the potential limitations on hate speech following the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk; 2.) the arrest and revocation of the student visa of a Tufts University Ph.D. student from Turkey who had written an opinion piece for the school newspaper critical of the university’s position on the war in Gaza; 3.) the banning of the Associated Press from Oval Office events and Air Force One following its refusal to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, which is President Trump’s preferred name.
The Lakeville Journal has obtained permission to publish the 2026 top three winners out of 70 entries from across Connecticut. First place went to Nora Kallusky, a senior at Ridgefield High School. There was a tie for Second Place, so Mayumi Iwai, a junior at Greenwich High School, and Prithika Venugopal, a senior at Rocky Hill High School, both received that honor.
Free speech or a loyalty test?