Court Temporarily Blocks Rule Ending ‘Duration of Status’ for International Students
F-1 visa applicants wait to be interviewed at the US Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh.
US Embassy Dhaka
A federal judge has temporarily blocked a Department of Homeland Security rule that would have ended the decades-old duration of status system for international students and scholars, keeping the existing framework in place for now.
District Judge Dennis Saylor of Massachusetts issued a preliminary injunction on Sept. 14, putting the DHS rule on hold one day before it was scheduled to take effect. The rule replaces the current duration of status system, which allows F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors to stay in the US for the duration of their programs, with fixed admission periods of no more than four years. Fixed admission periods will mean that students and researchers who need more time to complete their studies will have to apply for an extension of stay. The rule also imposes new restrictions on transferring institutions, changing educational objectives, and pursuing additional degrees.
The injunction stems from a lawsuit filed by several higher education and labor groups seeking to overturn DHS’s rule. Saylor found that the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claims that DHS had not fulfilled its statutory obligations when it promulgated the final rule, noting that the Administrative Procedure Act requires DHS to assess the rule’s costs and benefits, consider less burdensome alternatives, respond meaningfully to significant public comments, and show a rational connection between the rule and its stated fraud and national security objectives. Saylor highlighted several areas where he felt DHS fell short of meeting these requirements.
Saylor did not opt to permanently strike down the rule as the plaintiffs requested, taking the more cautious approach of barring DHS from implementing the rule while the litigation proceeds. Saylor did, however, leave open the possibility for the plaintiffs to ask for that remedy again, stating in his opinion that vacating the rule “may ultimately prove to be appropriate.”
The plaintiffs welcomed the decision, with NAFSA: Association of International Educators CEO Fanta Aw describing it as an “important step toward preserving a fair and predictable system” for international students and scholars.
President’s Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration President Miriam Feldblum said the decision “recognizes the serious and irreparable harm this rule would cause to international students and scholars, higher education institutions, and communities across the country, as well as to the US economy, research and innovation.”
DHS General Counsel James Percival criticized the ruling, writing on X: “Come on a student visa, take one class per semester, and stay here for decades. According to Judge Dennis Saylor, ICE must permit this rampant abuse of our immigration system.”
The next step in the case is a status conference scheduled for Oct. 2.
Despite the DHS rule being blocked for now, Michael Clemens, a professor of economics in the School of Government and Policy at Johns Hopkins University, said the decision may do little to resolve uncertainty for prospective students.
“This ruling by itself will do little to reassure international students,” Clemens said, noting that the rule “could be reinstated by later court decisions.”
Clemens and co-authors Jeremy Neufeld and Amy Nice examined the potential effect of immigration restrictions on the US science and technology workforce in a working paper commissioned for a National Academies summit. A survey of around 1,000 international PhD students and postdoctoral researchers in the US found that around half of respondents said they would not have come to the US if they knew they might need to apply for another visa to finish their PhD.
Permanently vacating the rule would provide much greater certainty to prospective students, Clemens said. He added that the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, SEVIS, already gives immigration authorities a mechanism to identify potential visa violations. “There is no evidence at all that slashing the duration of student visas is necessary to fight visa fraud,” he said.
