Trump’s four-year student visa cap blocked in courts

A federal judge has temporarily blocked a Trump administration rule that would have imposed a four-year cap on international student visas and replaced the existing “duration of status” system.

Under the current US visa system, which has been in place for nearly half a century, students on F-1 visas and J-1 exchange visas are granted legal status for as long as it takes to complete their degrees.

About 1.6 million individuals in the US hold F visas and there are 500,000 with J visas. 

However, the Department of Homeland Security’s proposed policy, which was introduced in July, would limit international students to a strict four-year stay. A coalition representing 600 higher education institutions and university groups mounted a legal challenge to the new rule last month. 

The proposed visa cap, blocked one day before it was set to take effect, would principally affect international students enrolled in graduate courses as these often take longer than four years to complete. The average PhD in the US takes six years.

International students who need more time to complete their research would be required to apply for an extension, subject to approval by the Department of Homeland Security.

But a federal judge in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, F. Dennis Saylor, has blocked the policy, describing government’s rationale for the rule as “exceptionally weak” in a 48-page order.

National security concerns and potential abuse of the visa system have been offered as rationales by the administration, but “the government’s contention that the rule is necessary to safeguard national security borders on the absurd,” Saylor wrote.

He added that the damage such a policy could inflict on the higher education system and US economy “is likely to be catastrophic”.

According to Nafsa: the Association of International Educators, international students contribute about $43 billion (£31.8 billion) to the US economy each academic year.

Saylor’s ruling is a preliminary court order and the new rule could still take effect, depending on how the case proceeds. The next scheduled step is a federal court hearing on 2 October, but the Trump administration could appeal the injunction in the meantime.

Lizzi C. Lee, fellow at the New York City-based Asia Society Policy Institute, told Times Higher Education that the court’s decision “offers temporary relief”.

“I worry about the current stance of the administration, which has not changed,” she said. “From the competitiveness perspective, making it harder for international students and researchers to stay is extremely self-defeating…Our advantage in innovation depends critically on our ongoing ability to attract the world’s best talent, including from China.”

Lee added that at a time when the US and China are “competing intensely for top-tier talent, I find it puzzling that our policy, which really should be about how to attract and retain the best people, has instead been finding new reasons for them to go elsewhere”.

Binita Parekh, an overseas education consultant who works with Indian students, took a similar view. “Increasing uncertainty around visa appointments” makes the US less attractive to global students, she said. And “If the US keeps narrowing the pathways for global talent to come, study and gain experience, how will they get the top-notch talent pool needed for economic growth?”

But she was encouraged by the legal block on the administration’s move, even if it was only temporary.

“What I find particularly encouraging is that more than 600 universities and institutions have stood together on this issue. That collective response, in many ways, is more significant than the temporary outcome itself,” she said.

rosalind.skillen@timeshighereducation.com