A federal judge on Monday blocked the Trump administration from imposing a four-year cap on certain student and scholar visas, stopping a policy that was set to take effect Tuesday before it could reach foreign graduate students and postdoctoral researchers.
The preliminary injunction keeps in place a long-standing policy that has allowed foreign students and scholars to remain in the U.S. for the duration of their training. The ruling came in a lawsuit brought by academic groups, including NAFSA: Association of International Educators and the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, over a change that would have touched graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and other visa holders in the same training track.
Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts wrote that the Department of Homeland Security’s move clearly failed to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act. He said the administration’s national security case was weak and that its explanation raised legitimate questions about whether the real aim was something else, including greater government control over academic institutions. Saylor also said he was struggling to see any real, rational connection between the national security concerns cited and the change itself.
The judge’s skepticism cut against the government’s central argument. In a Sept. 3 hearing, Paul Hughes said the schools affected by the rule would face irreparable harm if the policy went into effect or if the court did not throw it out. Michael Celone countered that the government had done its due diligence and that students covered by the policy could apply for extensions or easily go elsewhere. Saylor said the security issues identified involved fewer than half a dozen incidents over 50 years, and he also questioned how briefly the rule had been open for public comment.
The order preserves the status quo for now, but it does not end the case. Saylor declined to issue summary judgment striking down the rule outright, leaving the lawsuit alive as the court moves toward full arguments. That means the four-year cap remains blocked while the court weighs whether the Department of Homeland Security can defend a rule that a judge has already said sits badly with both the law and the record.
