A federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s prohibition preventing Harvard University from enrolling international students.
A Federal virtual hearing on the case is scheduled for Tuesday, with a follow-up in-person session planned for Thursday at the federal courthouse in Boston. That hearing will consider whether to issue a preliminary injunction that would temporarily block the government’s actions until the lawsuit is resolved. The timing coincides with Harvard’s commencement ceremonies, where many international graduates will be celebrating as their futures hang in the balance just miles away.
Federal The Trump administration’s move to strip Harvard’s ability to enroll foreign students is widely viewed as punitive retaliation for the university’s resistance to the White House’s ideological conditions — such as demands for student disciplinary records and the elimination of equity programs — which have also targeted other U.S. colleges.
University President Alan Garber assured the Harvard community of their commitment to international students: “You are our peers, friends, mentors, and collaborators. Because of you, our understanding grows, and our world becomes wiser and more resilient.
In response, DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin argued, “This lawsuit challenges the President’s constitutionally granted authority under Article II. Enrolling foreign students is a privilege, not a right, and universities benefit financially from international tuition to bolster their vast endowments. The Trump administration is focused on restoring common sense to the student visa system, and no lawsuit will change that.
When asked at the White House whether other universities might face similar restrictions, President Trump replied, “We’re looking at a lot of things.
This latest legal battle adds to Harvard’s ongoing dispute with the administration over the $2.65 billion freeze in federal grants and contracts, which is also being overseen by Judge Burroughs. Harvard has chosen not to seek an immediate injunction against the funding freeze, meaning it will likely remain in place until at least late July, when both parties will present their arguments.
Though the funding freeze and international student restrictions are separate cases, Harvard characterizes them as part of a broader governmental effort to pressure the university into surrendering its First Amendment protections.
In a further financial challenge, the Internal Revenue Service has signaled plans to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status.
The timing of the foreign student enrollment ban has rattled the global student community preparing to attend one of America’s most prestigious universities. An incoming freshman from New Zealand described the announcement as a “heart-dropping” moment.
Harvard’s Vice Provost for International Affairs, Mark Elliott, stressed in a sworn affidavit that “there is no substitute for the presence and contributions of international students, whose trust in Harvard is now jeopardized unless the court swiftly intervenes to declare this disruptive government action unlawful.”
Secretary Noem stated she ordered the termination of Harvard’s SEVP certification after the university declined to submit requested disciplinary records of foreign students last month.
Harvard maintains that it did provide the requested information, but the Department of Homeland Security deemed the response “insufficient” without specifying why or citing any regulation that Harvard allegedly violated.
The university accuses the government of disregarding its own protocols by revoking Harvard’s certification without giving the school an opportunity to contest the decision or present evidence of compliance.
The official Revocation Notice failed to afford Harvard a chance to defend itself or be heard before stripping its certification under the SEVP.
Harvard could restore its permission to enroll international students by providing five years of conduct records related to those students “within 72 hours,” according to a letter from Secretary Noem addressed to the university.
In its lawsuit filed Friday, Harvard argued that this latest government demand adds to previously set conditions and pointed out that officials “offered no legal or regulatory basis for these new requirements.”
This revocation threatens nearly 7,000 Harvard students, causing widespread uncertainty and distress. Faculty members caution that a large-scale departure of international students could severely undermine Harvard’s academic excellence, even as the institution continues its fight to preserve its ideological independence from government interference.
On Thursday, the White House accused Harvard’s administration of transforming “their once-prestigious university into a breeding ground for anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist activists,” emphasizing that “accepting foreign students is a privilege, not a right.”
“They’ve continuously failed to act on serious issues that are harming American students, and now they must be held accountable,” said White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson in a statement to CNN.
Harvard and the Trump administration have been embroiled in a prolonged dispute, with federal officials pushing for sweeping changes to the university’s campus culture, employment practices, admissions policies, and programming. The administration claims these reforms are necessary to eliminate antisemitism and dismantle what it terms “racist diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.” In particular, the White House has focused on international students and faculty it believes were involved in campus protests related to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Harvard, for its part, has acknowledged the presence of antisemitism during the last academic year and says it has started implementing specific measures to address the issue.
Former Harvard president Lawrence Summers said the administration’s move would force many Jewish students out of the university. “But expelling every Israeli student from Harvard is far more prejudiced against Jews and Israelis than any of the actions they’ve criticized.”
University leaders argue that many of the administration’s demands, such as auditing the political views of students and faculty, overstep constitutional limits and infringe on Harvard’s rights as an academic institution.
Though several universities across the country are under pressure from federal officials, Harvard has emerged as the most vocal and steadfast in defending its educational autonomy.
Harvard University has sharply criticized the revocation of its SEVP (Student and Exchange Visitor Program) certification, calling the move “illegal” and reaffirming its strong commitment to hosting international scholars and students. In a statement, the university emphasized that its global academic community, representing more than 140 nations, greatly enriches both Harvard and the broader American society.
This retaliatory measure poses a significant threat to the university’s mission and undermines its global academic and research contributions.”
Harvard has nearly 10,000 individuals in its international academic population, and figures from the current academic year show that international students make up over a quarter—27.2%—of its student body, or 6,793 students.
Jewish students and alumni expressed concerns over rising antisemitism on campus.
Reports from two internal task forces released last month revealed that both Jewish and Muslim students experienced fear and alienation during the 2023–2024 academic year. These reports recommended several policy changes, some of which Harvard has already enacted.
He noted that President Garber has made meaningful progress in addressing both the symptoms and deeper causes of anti-Jewish bias at the university.
Rubenstein condemned the federal action as a hasty and disorganized attack that disregards the importance of dialogue, negotiation, and due process. He warned it could erode the institutional independence and legal principles that support American freedoms.
As part of its compliance with federal demands, Harvard has renamed its Office of Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging to “Community and Campus Life.” Despite this change, South Dakota Governor.
The Trump administration appears to be using Harvard as an example, with similar threats reportedly directed at other institutions that do not align with its directives.
“This should be a wake-up call for every college: get your house in order,” Noem said during an appearance on Fox News.
Shockwaves Across Campus
Thousands of international students now face uncertainty, with many fearing they may lose their place at the institution they fought hard to join.
“This is coercion, plain and simple,” said Lawrence Summers, former Harvard president and ex-Treasury Secretary under President Bill Clinton.
Jared, an 18-year-old incoming freshman from New Zealand, told CNN that hearing the news was “gut-wrenching.” After the joy of receiving his Harvard acceptance to study Sociology in March.
“I can’t let myself spiral over something out of my control,” Jared said. “All I can do now is focus on the options that are still open to me—maybe remote classes.”
Current international students are also facing anxiety. He described the situation as nerve-wracking and said students have been in constant communication with each other, trying to figure out next steps.
“Many of us have spent our whole lives preparing to study at a place like Harvard,” Molden said. “Now we’re left in limbo, wondering if we’ll have to transfer or deal with visa issues.”
He added that many international students are also worried about losing access to the financial aid that Harvard uniquely offers or having to give up prestigious internships.
Molden compared the political climate in the U.S. to authoritarian strategies he recognizes from Europe. “Coming from Austria, I’ve seen how democratic backsliding happens,” he said. “What I’m witnessing here is frighteningly similar.”
Faculty and Global Reactions
Many faculty members fear that losing international students will diminish Harvard’s scholarly excellence and set back the wider American academic landscape.
Jason Furman, an economics professor and former Obama administration official, called the decision “disastrous in every sense.”
“They bring incredible value to our classrooms, our research, and to America’s global leadership in education. This could deal a major blow to one of our country’s greatest strengths—higher education.”
One professor told CNN anonymously that if the policy is enforced, entire research labs may be forced to shut down.
Kevin Rudd, Australia’s ambassador to the U.S., expressed concern for Australian students affected by the situation and said consular services would be made available to help them navigate the crisis.
Harvard’s chapter of the American Association of University Professors issued a strongly worded statement condemning the move. “This is an unconstitutional attack on our international students,” the group said. “It escalates the administration’s campaign of fear against global scholars in the United States.”
The group reaffirmed that international students are vital to Harvard’s identity and mission.
Harvard President Garber echoed these sentiments in a message to the university community.