BOSTON – The Trump administration violated the Constitution when it targeted non-U.S. citizens for deportation solely for supporting Palestinians and criticizing Israel, a federal judged said Tuesday in a scathing ruling directly and sharply criticizing President Donald Trump and his policies as serious threats to free speech.

U.S. District Judge William Young in Boston agreed with several university associations that the policy they described as ideological deportation violates the First Amendment as well as the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governing how federal agencies develop and issue regulations. Young also found the policy was “arbitrary or capricious because it reverses prior policy without reasoned explanation.”

“This case — perhaps the most important ever to fall within the jurisdiction of this district court — squarely presents the issue whether noncitizens 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,’ ” Young, a nominee of Republican President Ronald Reagan, wrote.

The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“The Trump administration’s attempt to deport students for their political views is an assault on the Constitution and a betrayal of American values,” said Todd Wolfson, president of the American Association of University Professors union.

“This trial exposed their true aim: to intimidate and silence anyone who dares oppose them.”

The ruling came after a trial during which lawyers for the associations presented witnesses who testified that the Trump administration had launched a coordinated effort to target students and scholars who had criticized Israel or showed sympathy for Palestinians.

“Not since the McCarthy era have immigrants been the target of such intense repression for lawful political speech,” Ramya Krishnan, senior staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute, told the court.

Young will hold a separate hearing on the relief requested by the plaintiffs, which is likely to be a request that the Trump administration stop engaging in ideological deportations.

Lawyers for the Trump administration put up witnesses who testified there was no ideological deportation policy as the plaintiffs contended.

“There is no policy to revoke visas on the basis of protected speech,” Victoria Santora told the court.

Young accused Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and their agents of misusing their powers to target noncitizens who were pro-Palestinian in order to silence them and, in doing so, “intentionally denying such individuals (including the plaintiffs here) the freedom of speech that is their right.”

“Moreover, the effect of these targeted deportation proceedings continues unconstitutionally to chill freedom of speech to this day,” he added.

Young also criticized Trump in his 161-page ruling, suggesting he supported the policy, even though he may not have authorized its operation. “The facts prove that the President himself approves truly scandalous and unconstitutional suppression of free speech” on the part of two of his senior Cabinet secretaries, he wrote.