Judge blocks Trump administration’s visa restrictions for foreign researchers, trust-and-safety professionals including CEO of the US-based …

A US federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from enforcing an immigration policy that could deny visas or deport foreign researchers and trust-and-safety professionals working on misinformation, disinformation and online hate speech. Chief US District Judge James Boasberg ruled that the policy likely violates the free speech protections of the US Constitution’s First Amendment. The decision also affects people linked to US-based organisations, including Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) CEO Imran Ahmed, who was among those previously targeted under the administration’s visa restrictions.For those unaware, the State Department imposed visa bans on five Europeans, including Imran Ahmed, the British CEO of the U.S.-based Center for Countering Digital Hate, and Clare Melford, co-founder of the Global Disinformation Index in December last year. As per the lawsuit, both organisations are members of the Coalition for Independent Technology Research.

What the judge said about Trump visa policy

The lawsuit was originally filed by the Coalition for Independent Technology Research, which argued that the US State Department had launched a broad campaign against researchers and advocates working on content moderation and combating online misinformation.The State Department, the court order said, announced a policy targeting foreign nationals in 2025 that is said to be complicit in censoring Americans. “What began as a visa-restriction policy later expanded, according to Plaintiff Coalition for Independent Technology Research, into a broader campaign against noncitizens who work on misinformation, disinformation, fact checking, content moderation, compliance, and trust and safety,” the order stated.Judge Boasberg agreed that the policy likely placed foreign nationals at risk because of their work. He said non-citizens, including researchers working with the coalition, “could reasonably understand the policy to place their immigration status at risk — not because they wield foreign sovereign power or facilitate its censorship, but simply because they work in content moderation.”The judge said the administration appeared to be treating research and advocacy supporting stronger content moderation as grounds for visa denials, exclusion or deportation, likely violating First Amendment protections.Carrie DeCell, a lawyer representing the coalition through the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, welcomed the ruling.“This policy punishes researchers for work the public needs and the First Amendment protects,” DeCell said. “We’re glad the court recognized the serious constitutional harms this policy is already causing and blocked the government from enforcing it while the case proceeds”.