John Nichols was detained for 30 minutes on the tarmac of a Miami airport last month when he and two colleagues returned from an illegal trip to Cuba.

Nichols, a Penn State communications professor, is a member of three different organizations vying for changes in current U.S. policy regarding the travel of American citizens to Cuba. Wayne Smith, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, and Phillip Brenner, from American University, accompanied Nichols on the trip.

"I'm a patriotic American," Nichols said. "I like to think I'm a good guy. And it's not fun to be detained by officials of your own government and to be harangued and lectured and browbeat. In your darker moments you tend to question your own goverment when you see these things."

Upon landing at the airport, the three men were confronted by U.S. Treasury Department officials who threatened to incarcerate them. Nichols described the experience as "unfun."

Six more professors were detained for four-and-a-half hours yesterday after returning from a second illegal trip to Cuba but were not charged. Nichols, Smith and Brenner have yet to be charged themselves.

An official from the U.S. Department of Justice would not comment on the matter.

"As far as I know, (the case) is still under consideration," said John Russell, an attorney with the department.

The illegal voyage last month was actually an attempt to be formally charged with violating travel restrictions, so the law can be appealed before the U.S. Supreme Court and possibly rescinded.

"The question is whether the government can decide what is news and what is not, what is research and what is not," Nichols said. "The constitution says they can't do that."

He compared the situation to the case of Rosa Parks, saying Parks was probably not trying to be arrested when she refused to give up her bus seat to a white man. Although her actions were technically illegal, exercising her rights as an American citizen required her to break the law.

"She was not guilty because the law was unconstitutional," Nichols said. "In order to right a governmental error, there needs to be, on rare occasions, acts of civil disobedience to test the constitutionality of the law."

Travel to Cuba by U.S. citizens is a violation of the Trading with the Enemy Act, passed during World War I to prevent allied industry from trading with Austria-Hungary. The act states that financial transactions of any kind between enemies of the United States and its citizens are prohibited. In 1962, then president John F. Kennedy declared Cuba an enemy of the United States.

One exception to the act allowed journalists and researchers to travel to the island freely. However, the Clinton administration revoked the exception for researchers on Aug. 20, 1994, requiring researchers to apply for a permit in order to be allowed to visit.

Nichols could face a fine of up to $100,000 or 10 years in jail for challenging the law.

Nichols and the three organizations sponsoring the trip -- the Center for International Policy, the Center for Constitutional Rights and the Latin American Studies Program -- see the new restrictions as violating the First Amendment. The Treasury Department has turned the case over to the Justice Department for review.

Smith, a former U.S. diplomat in Havana and a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, led the second group to the island nation on Jan. 15 in an attempt to force the government to press charges.

"Wayne's main concerns right now are lifting the travel controls, which he feels are unconstitutional," said Krista Hughes, administration assistant for the Center for International Policy. "As far as I know, nothing has been done."

The center continues to wait for the government to move against them, but the Justice Department has yet to charge anyone who took part in the trip with violating the restrictions.

"As far as I know, there have been no charges filed at this time," said Nita Manitzas, a contact with the Center for International Policy. "It says that they know the Center for International Policy is right."

Linda Ratner, attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, is prepared to defend the three men should the government charge them.

"That's a policy decision (the government) will have to make," Ratner said. "We're prepared to fight them legally while there is no state of war."

Although Nichols hopes for a speedy remedy to what he thinks infringes upon the First Amendment, he is not anxious to begin a lengthy court battle.

"I'm very ambivalent. On the one hand I would not like to go through a prolonged indictment," Nichols said. "But, of course, the reason we did it was for that very thing."