President Donald Trump's administration has targeted for arrest and deportation a number of non-citizen pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel student activists and protest leaders on college and university campuses nationwide.

A Republican-appointed federal judge, however, just lambasted the president and his top officials for, in his view, egregiously violating the First Amendment-protected free speech and free assembly rights of those non-citizen individuals, according to Fox News.

The judge even went so far as to quote his wife in chastising Trump as a "bully" who "ignores" anything and everything in his way, including the nation's laws and court decisions, in ruling against the administration's actions to silence antisemitic supporters of Hamas terrorists.

Free speech protections apply to non-citizens

In a blistering 161-page decision released on Wednesday, Reagan-appointed Massachusetts U.S. District Judge William Young wrote, "This case -- perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court -- squarely presents the issue whether non-citizens lawfully present here in United States actually have the same free speech rights as the rest of us."

"The Court answers this Constitutional question unequivocally 'yes, they do.' 'No law' means 'no law,'" he continued. "The First Amendment does not draw President Trump’s invidious distinction and it is not to be found in our history or jurisprudence. No one’s freedom of speech is unlimited, of course, but these limits are the same for both citizens and non-citizens alike."

"Having carefully considered the entirety of the record, this Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem and the Secretary of State Marco Rubio, together with the subordinate officials and agents of each of them, deliberately and with purposeful aforethought, did so concert their actions and those of their two departments intentionally to chill the rights to freedom of speech and peacefully to assemble of the non-citizen plaintiff members of the plaintiff associations," Young declared.

Trump is a "bully" who "ignores" everything opposed to him

At issue here are the arrests and attempted deportations of prominent anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian academics and student activists, such as Mahmoud Khalil and Rumeysa Ozturk, who have organized and led disruptive campus protests, encouraged antisemitic violence, and expressed support for the murderous acts of Hamas terrorists.

Judge Young surmised that rather than "deport all pro-Palestinian non-citizens," which might prompt a "major outcry," the Trump administration "was more insidious" in specifically targeting just a few protest leaders for deportation, "with the goal of tamping down pro-Palestinian student protests and terrorizing similarly situated non-citizen (and other) pro-Palestinians into silence because their views were unwelcome."

Fox News noted that the judge labeled President Trump a "bully" who was intent on seeking "retribution" against those who disagree with his views, and wrote, "Yet government retribution for speech (precisely what has happened here) is directly forbidden by the First Amendment."

According to The Hill, Young even cited a purportedly unrelated observation from his wife, whom he quoted as allegedly saying at some point about the president, "He seems to be winning. He ignores everything and keeps bullying ahead," which he suggested "perfectly captures" Trump's persona.

"The Constitution, our civil laws, regulations, mores, customs, practices, courtesies -- all of it; the President simply ignores it all when he takes it into his head to act," the judge said. "A broad swath of our people find this refreshing in what they may feel is an over regulated society. After all, lawyers seem to have a penchant for telling you what you can’t do. President Trump simply ignores them."

More Trump-bashing from the judge

The Hill further reported that Judge Young dismissed the leftist notion that President Trump is "lawless," and instead wrote, "He is not. As an experienced litigator he has learned that -- at least on the civil side of our courts -- neither our Constitution nor laws enforce themselves, and he can do most anything until an aggrieved person or entity will stand up and say him 'Nay,' i.e. take him to court."

He went on to acknowledge the "daunting prospect" faced by anyone, citizens and non-citizens alike, in standing up to a "duly elected president" with "broad immunity from any personal liability" who has repeatedly shown that he is "prepared to deploy all the resources of the nation against obstruction."

According to Fox News, the judge concluded his lengthy opinion, "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?"