Update (May 23, 2025): On Friday, May 23, 2025, Harvard University filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's decision to revoke its certification for enrolling international students. A federal judge subsequently issued a temporary order blocking the enrollment ban, allowing Harvard to continue enrolling international students while the legal proceedings unfold. Source: AP News
In an unprecedented move, the Trump administration's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced on Thursday, May 22, 2025, that it has revoked Harvard University's certification to enroll international students. This drastic measure, effective immediately, stems from Harvard's alleged failure to comply with demands for records related to campus activities, particularly those involving international students in recent protests.
The decision, communicated by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, means Harvard can no longer issue the necessary immigration documents (I-20 forms) for new international students to obtain F-1 visas.
More critically, it threatens the immigration status of Harvard's approximately 6,800 current international students, who comprise about 27% of the university's total student body. According to the DHS directive, these students will now be forced to transfer to another SEVP (Student and Exchange Visitor Program)-certified institution or risk losing their legal immigration status, including employment authorization, and potentially facing deportation.
The stated rationale behind this severe action is multifaceted. The DHS cited Harvard's alleged non-compliance with requests for detailed records, including audio and video of protest activities involving international students.
The administration also pointed to Harvard's use of diversity and inclusion policies, its handling of pro-Palestinian protests, fostering an unsafe environment hostile to Jewish students, promoting pro-Hamas sympathies, alleged coordination with the Chinese Communist Party, and rising campus crime rates. Secretary Noem emphasized that enrolling foreign students is a "privilege, not a right," framing the move as a consequence of Harvard's perceived failures.
The immediate implications for Harvard's international students are dire and complex. Many are now in a frantic race against time to understand their options and secure their academic and immigration future.
Transferring to another SEVP-certified school involves a labyrinthine process of applying to new institutions, securing acceptance, transferring credits, and navigating a new visa sponsorship. This comes with immense financial and emotional burdens, not to mention the disruption to their studies and research.
For those unable to transfer swiftly, the consequences could be severe. If their SEVIS records are terminated, they would lose their legal status in the U.S., rendering them unable to continue their studies or work.
This could also impact their ability to re-enter the country in the future and complicate any subsequent visa applications. This situation echoes previous, though less targeted, mass SEVIS terminations by the Trump administration in early 2025, which caused widespread panic, loss of work authorization, and legal limbo for thousands of students across hundreds of institutions, though many of those terminations were later reversed by federal court orders.
Harvard University immediately condemned the DHS's decision as "unlawful" and "retaliatory," asserting that it poses serious harm to its community and undermines its core academic and research mission. The university has publicly stated its "full commitment" to supporting its international students and maintaining its ability to host them.
Harvard's International Office (HIO) has begun advising students, urging them to focus on their academics while promising further guidance on issues like summer travel and providing access to their FAQ section. The university is expected to file a second legal challenge, having previously sued the administration over attempts to intervene in its admissions and hiring practices.
Harvard's legal strategy will likely leverage precedents set by earlier successful challenges to government overreach in international education. Previous court rulings have blocked mass SEVIS terminations, citing violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and due process.
Harvard is expected to argue similar legal grounds, contending that the DHS's action is arbitrary, capricious, and lacks proper justification, especially given the broad and politically charged nature of the accusations leveled against the institution. The university had partially complied with some earlier DHS requests for disciplinary records but had refused to provide all requested information, particularly audio and video of protests, citing concerns about privacy and free speech.
This targeted action against Harvard sends a chilling message across the entire landscape of American higher education. Organizations representing universities have swiftly denounced the decision.
PEN America called it a "brazen escalation" and an attack on academic freedom, reducing students to "pawns in a political game." Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education (ACE), labeled the move "illegal, small-minded," warning of a widespread "chilling effect" that could deter international students from choosing the U.S.
The DHS's own statement, asserting that the action serves as a "warning to all universities," underscores the potential for similar measures against other institutions.
This threat could compel universities to adopt more restrictive policies regarding campus speech and activism, potentially compromising the principles of open inquiry and free expression. The Association of American Universities (AAU) has vocally supported Harvard's stance on academic freedom and institutional autonomy, joining a chorus of educational bodies that view this as a dangerous politicization of the student visa program.
The long-term consequences for future international applicants to U.S. universities are likely to be profound.
The U.S. has already seen a recent 1% decline in international student applicants, according to Common App data, a trend influenced by prior restrictive immigration policies and perceived unwelcoming rhetoric. This direct targeting of an elite institution like Harvard, a beacon for global talent, is expected to exacerbate that trend.
Experts anticipate an "enrollment backslide," making the outlook bleak for a sector that relies heavily on international students for both intellectual diversity and significant economic contributions. The global perception of the U.S. as a reliable and welcoming destination for higher education is at stake.
Countries like Canada, the UK, and Australia, while facing their own challenges, could capitalize on this perceived instability in the U.S., drawing away prospective students who prioritize certainty and a stable visa environment. This move could fundamentally alter the competitive landscape of global higher education, potentially diminishing America's standing as a premier destination for the world's brightest minds.