In a victory for the First Amendment and free speech rights, a federal judge has granted all defendants’ motions to dismiss a civil lawsuit that the Trump Administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) filed against pro-Palestine protestors in federal court in New Jersey. The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) represents one of the defendants in this matter, the Party for Socialism and Liberation New Jersey (PSL-NJ).
Led by the DOJ’s Harmeet Dhillon, the lawsuit, as to PSL-NJ, asserted that the PSL-NJ issued a post on social media which called for a protest at a public intersection against the planned sale of illegally seized Palestinian land in the West Bank and that this post was a threat against, and interfered with, Jewish worship services, violating the Freedom Of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE Act). In a ruling released Wednesday evening, September 30, the Court found that the alleged PSL-NJ post on social media was protected speech, as “a call to assemble and engage in political advocacy in a public forum,” not a threat of violence.
The protest was condemning a real estate event in New Jersey in which land in the illegal settlement of Givat Hamatos, situated in the occupied territory of East Jerusalem, would be sold to U.S.-based and Israel-aligned investors, to create what is advertised to be “a new Anglo community in Jerusalem.” The settlement, internationally recognized as illegal, dispossesses the indigenous Palestinian people of their land and would establish a permanent barrier for Palestinians, separating and denying access between occupied East Jerusalem and Bethlehem.
The Trump Administration claimed that the commercial real estate sales location at a synagogue rendered it part of worship activities and that such sale or purchase of stolen land is itself a tenet or practice of Jewish faith.
The PCJF also challenged the government’s civil prosecution as vindictive and viewpoint discrimination. The Court acknowledged these arguments but found that it did not have to reach them because it dismissed the claim against PSL-NJ independently as failing to allege a FACE Act violation.
The Government’s motivation in the vindictive prosecution of this matter as to PSL-NJ requires no resort to inference: lead attorney Dhillon has stated expressly that the Department of Justice’s goal in this lawsuit and other DOJ activity is to “dismantle” and shut down the activities of groups who protest and advocate for Palestinian human rights, specifically identifying the Party for Socialism and Liberation. Dhillon further condemned targeted organizations’ protests against the conduct of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (“DOJ aims to ‘dismantle’ groups behind synagogue protests, Harmeet Dhillon says”, Jewish Insider (Feb. 10, 2026).)
The Government’s weaponization of the FACE Act is especially notable in the context of a Department of Justice memorandum which announced a discriminatory policy by which FACE Act actions’ involving anti-abortion activists targeting of reproductive health clinics, the primary impetus for the law, “will be permitted only in extraordinary circumstances.” (Department of Justice, Memorandum for Kathleen Wolfe, Supervisory Official of the Civil Right Division, FACE Act Charging Policy (Jan. 24, 2026))
“This lawsuit is an affront to the First Amendment and has been overtly brought for an improper purpose,” stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the PCJF and counsel in this litigation. “The Department of Justice is abusing its authority to carry out an ideological agenda and punish viewpoints with which it disagrees. By filing this lawsuit, the Government has engaged in blatant viewpoint discrimination using the power of the state to bring meritless litigation in order to censor and punish based on viewpoint. This lawsuit is an unconstitutional act to suppress freedom of speech and is dangerous to democratic norms.”
“The PCJF stands firm in its opposition to lawfare, the weaponization of government law enforcement to suppress lawful protest and shield U.S.-backed Israeli actions to dispossess Palestinians of their homeland. Israel’s actions are unlawful under the Fourth Geneva Convention, just as the U.S. Government’s suppression of free speech is equally illegal and unconstitutional,” added Carl Messineo, PCJF Legal Director and counsel on this case.
The case is United States of America v. Party for Socialism and Liberation New Jersey, et al., Civil Action No.: 2:25-cv-16049, U.S. District Court District of New Jersey.