Massachusetts Judge Halts Trump Era Visa Rule for Students and Journalists

A Massachusetts federal judge stopped a Trump administration rule that tightened time limits for foreign students and journalists in the US. The order, issued on Monday, paused the policy one day before a planned Tuesday start. The move eased worries for international students, including many from India, while the court case continued.

Judge F Dennis Saylor IV granted a preliminary injunction and applied it nationwide. The judge said the policy would likely cause “catastrophic” harm to the US economy and universities. The ruling also dismissed the government view that the block should apply only to the groups that sued.

The lawsuit involved groups representing nearly 600 public and private institutions. Judge Saylor noted the US had more than 5,000 higher-education institutions. The judge said a narrow order would force parallel rules. It could also trigger repeated, inconsistent decisions about which students or campuses were covered.

Several bodies from higher education and labour unions asked the court to strike down the rule. Harvard President Alan M. Garber criticised the timing limits in July. Garber called the rule “odd”. “A typical PhD programme usually takes at least six years, so four years is a bit odd as the cutoff for the visa,” Garber said in July.

The rule was finalised in July and covered student and exchange visitor visas. It set a four-year limit for most applicants. It also capped journalists’ visas at 240 days, except for China. Under the blocked policy, journalists from China faced a 90-day visa limit.

The limits allowed extensions, but DHS officials had full discretion. The rule offered no right to appeal if an extension was refused. The following table lists the key time caps described in the policy.

Student visas: DHS arguments and the judge’s concerns

The Department of Homeland Security said the limits would reduce fraud and help stop overstays. Judge Saylor also warned the policy could be misused. The order highlighted the risk that “in particular, the obvious likelihood that the visas of foreign journalists who are critical of the government (or, more particularly, DHS officials) will not be renewed.”

“The weakness of the connection between the rule and its purported rationales raises legitimate questions as to whether its real purpose is not to safeguard national security and protect our borders, but to achieve other, undisclosed, goals – such as, for example, asserting greater government control over academic institutions and the press,” the judge in his decision granting the preliminary injunction.