US Court Blocks Move to Revoke Harvard’s Foreign Student Enrollment Rights

US Court Blocks Move to Revoke Harvard's Foreign Student Enrollment Rights
US Court Blocks Move to Revoke Harvard's Foreign Student Enrollment Rights
4 Min Read

In a significant legal blow to the Trump administration, a U.S. federal judge on Friday issued a temporary order blocking the government’s attempt to revoke Harvard University’s ability to enroll foreign students, according to a report by Reuters. The ruling was delivered by District Judge Allison Burroughs, who granted emergency relief just hours after Harvard filed a lawsuit challenging the policy in Boston federal court.

The university’s complaint described the administration’s decision as a “blatant violation” of constitutional protections and federal law. Harvard maintained that the move was a deliberate act of retaliation aimed at undermining its academic autonomy, particularly in light of its previous opposition to controversial White House directives on immigration and education.

Highlights:

  • Judge Allison Burroughs temporarily halts Trump administration’s visa policy targeting Harvard.

  • Harvard’s lawsuit alleges unconstitutional retaliation for resisting federal pressure.

  • The court’s order protects over 7,000 foreign students from imminent visa loss.

Harvard Claims Political Retaliation Over Academic Independence

Harvard’s lawsuit paints the Trump administration’s move as part of a broader campaign to penalize the university for refusing to conform to federal directives. Central to Harvard’s argument is that its Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification, essential for enrolling international students, was unjustly targeted in violation of First Amendment protections and administrative law.

The complaint emphasizes that international students are an inseparable part of Harvard’s identity and academic vitality. “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard,” the university stated. The potential revocation of SEVP status, it argued, would not only force student transfers and loss of visas but would cripple research programs and damage global academic collaboration.

Highlights:

  • Harvard alleges Trump administration targeted SEVP status as political punishment.

  • Lawsuit argues the move violates the First Amendment and administrative due process.

  • International students are integral to Harvard’s research and academic mission.

Immediate Implications for Harvard’s International Students

The injunction issued by Judge Burroughs provides immediate protection to more than 7,000 international students at Harvard, who faced the risk of deportation, interrupted studies, or abrupt institutional transfers. The temporary block on the enforcement of the new policy ensures these students can maintain their visa status while the legal battle continues.

Legal experts view the ruling as a critical defense of university autonomy in shaping admissions and academic policy. It also sets a precedent as one of the first major judicial interventions into Trump-era efforts to limit international student participation in U.S. higher education under immigration pretexts.

Highlights:

  • Injunction allows Harvard’s foreign students to retain legal visa status.

  • Decision upholds institutional control over admissions amid executive overreach.

  • Seen as a key judicial check on Trump-era immigration-linked education policies.

DOJ and DHS Silent; Appeal Likely

At the time of reporting, both the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) declined to comment on the court decision. However, legal analysts anticipate that the administration may seek to appeal the ruling in a higher court, potentially reigniting a protracted legal battle that could shape the future of foreign student policy in the U.S..

Harvard’s legal team has framed the case as not just a defense of institutional prerogatives but also a broader stand against the weaponization of immigration enforcement as a tool for political coercion.

Highlights:

  • DOJ and DHS have not issued statements but an appeal is expected.

  • Case could set precedent for federal overreach into academic admissions.

  • Legal observers view it as a pivotal test of constitutional protections for educational institutions.

Share This Article
Follow:

Sourabh loves writing about finance and market news. He has a good understanding of IPOs and enjoys covering the latest updates from the stock market. His goal is to share useful and easy-to-read news that helps readers stay informed.

Go to Top
Join our WhatsApp channel
Subscribe to our YouTube channel