Nine survivors of the Attacks of October 7 in southern Israel have filed a civil lawsuit against pro-Palestinian groups in the United States, alleging that they provide “material support” to “terrorism” through their lobbying activities on university campuses.

But the defendants are fighting back, warning that the case is part of a pattern of legal attacks aimed at putting pro-Palestinian groups on the defensive and curtailing free expression. US Universities.

“It is absolutely a threat to free speech, and it is a threat to free speech on every front, on every issue, not just Palestine,” said Christina Jump, an attorney for American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), one of the two defendants in the case.

The lawsuit, filed May 1 in federal court in Virginia, describes how the nine plaintiffs dodged gunfire and rescued relatives during the October 7 Attacks led by the Palestinian Hamas.

It further alleges that AMP and another campus group, the National Students for Justice in Palestine (NSJP), acted as a “propaganda arm of Hamas” and specifically targeted U.S. students.

The lawsuit alleges that AMP and NSJP worked to “recruit uninformed, misguided and impressionable college students as foot soldiers for Hamas on campus and elsewhere.”

The result, it is said, was “mental anguish and pain and suffering” for the nine survivors. But pro-Palestinian groups and free speech advocates fear that lawsuits like these are aimed at Student protesters by equating non-violent political activities with “terrorism”.

“There are legal organizations, whether nonprofit or quasi-governmental organizations or private companies, that use legal claims to intimidate political opponents,” says Yousef Munayyer, director of the Israel-Palestine program at the Arab Center think tank in Washington DC.

“We see this in many different contexts, but especially in Israel-Palestine, where it has become part of a strategy aimed at silencing dissent.”

Debate about speech on campus

An estimated 1,139 people were killed in the October 7 attacks and nearly 250 others were taken prisoner.

In response, Israel started a war in Gaza, bombing the narrow Palestinian enclave and cut off vital supplies such as food and water.

More than 36,000 Palestinians have been killed in Israel’s attack, many of them women and children. Human rights experts warn of a “risk of genocide.” The United Nations has also declared a “full-blown famine” in parts of Gaza, triggered by Israel’s siege and attempts to block humanitarian aid.

Universities have played a central role in the anti-war movement. Schools like Columbia University In New York, students set up camps and occupied buildings to draw attention to the plight of the Palestinians.

A study by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), a group that collects data on protests and political violence around the world, found that 97 percent of college protests were peaceful.

But the backlash was fierce. Some pro-Israel groups and elected officials called on universities to crack down on pro-Palestinian protesters, under the pretext of anti-Semitism.

Universities like Columbia responded by involving the police, leading to the arrest of thousands of protesters across the country. Other students were suspended or denied degrees because of their participation in the protests.

In at least one case at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), protesters physically attacked were attacked with metal pipes and batons by pro-Israel counter-demonstrators, while the police largely stood by.

Aaron Terr, director of public advocacy at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), said the backlash in some cases amounts to censorship.

“Freedom of speech on campus has really increased in the last few months,” Terr told Al Jazeera. “Most of the cases of censorship we have seen have been against pro-Palestinian individuals, although there are some cases on the pro-Israel side as well.”

Series of lawsuits

Advocates also see this month’s lawsuit as part of a broader trend to use the legal system to Suppress media and an advocacy group perceived as critical of Israel. The case is the latest in a series of lawsuits filed by pro-Israel groups in recent months.

In March, survivors of the October 7 attack sued an American non-profit organization that supports the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), accusing it of complicity in the deadly attack.

Israel, however, has no proof provided that UNRWA was involved, and an independent investigation cast further doubt on these allegations.

In April, relatives of the October 7 victims filed a petition in Canadian courts to prevent the country’s government from restoring funding to UNRWA, which provides vital aid to Gaza.

Another federal lawsuit filed earlier this year was directed against a Journalists’ organization: The Associated Press (AP). It alleged that The Associated Press hired Hamas members as freelancers for its news-gathering activities.

The same organization that sued the Associated Press is also involved in May’s case against AMP and NSJP: the Jewish National Advocacy Center (JNAC). The Associated Press called the lawsuit against the JNAC “meritless.”

The Jewish National Advocacy Center has alleged that the organizations named as defendants in its lawsuits have ties to Hamas.

“This case is simple: If someone tells you they are aiding and abetting terrorists, believe them,” said Mark Goldfeder, the center’s director, in a press release announcing the lawsuit against AMP and NSJP.

Goldfeder did not respond to Al Jazeera’s questions about the May lawsuit or the case against the Associated Press.

But Jump, AMP’s lawyer, said the charges against her organization contained false statements and untruths.

She said AMP operates exclusively in the United States – and not, as the complaint suggests, in conjunction with foreign organizations such as Hamas. She also added that NSJP is not a subsidiary of AMP, as the complaint claims.

“There are many points of discussion, many buzzwords, many generalizations and hasty conclusions,” Jump said of the lawsuit.

“Stress and intimidation”

Some critics say certain pro-Palestinian groups should be more closely scrutinized for the content of their messages, although they also dismiss the latest lawsuit as being too broad.

Many pro-Palestinian organizations have called for a ceasefire in Gaza and an end to support for Israel’s decades-long occupation of the Palestinian territories. The NSJP has expressed support for armed Palestinian groups, which it views as a legitimate form of resistance.

In the aftermath of the October 7 attacks, the NSJP published a document in which it described the violence as “a historic victory for the Palestinian resistance.”

Dov Waxman, director of the Nazarian Center for Israel Studies at UCLA, said the group’s rhetoric appears to be “implicit support for Hamas.”

This in turn could deter others from criticizing Israel’s behavior in the Gaza Strip, he added.

“I think SJP should be condemned for his support of terrorism,” Waxman said in an email, but he drew a distinction between free speech and what could be prosecuted.

“Rhetorical support of terrorism – as appalling as it is – is not the same as material support of terrorism,” he said. “In the United States, the former is protected free speech, the latter is a crime.”

Munayyer, an analyst at the Arab Center, said claims about links between pro-Palestinian advocacy groups and “terrorism” often fall apart upon closer examination. But he believes focusing on the cases’ flaws misses the point.

“The purpose of these efforts is to put victims on the defensive and force them to spend time, energy and resources on a legal defense that they could otherwise use to engage in activism,” he said.

“It’s about damaging reputations – pressuring and intimidating the organizations. It’s not really about winning.”