A coalition of higher education groups and unions has sued the Trump administration over a new rule limiting student visas to four years. The plaintiffs argue that the final rule, issued by the Department of Homeland Security last month, replaces a historically flexible federal approach to visas with “a rigid system of fixed admission periods arbitrarily capped at four years.”
The rule is set to take effect in September and has been met with opposition from the academic community. The coalition, which includes the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, the American Federation of Teachers, and NAFSA: Association of International Educators, claims that the rule violates statutory and regulatory procedures.
Background on the Rule
The final version of the rule requires students who want to stay past the four-year maximum to apply for extensions. Currently, international students are allowed to stay for the duration of their studies. The government has said that periodically assessing student visa stays will allow it to “better detect and mitigate the risks” of abuse.
Related: H-1B visa grace period may end under new proposal
According to the report, the open-ended nature of F and J visas, two types of visas popular among foreign students, permits fraud. The Department of Homeland Security said that 2,100 international students who entered the U.S. between 2000 and 2010 still held an active F visa as of April 2025. However, this is a tiny fraction of overall student visa holders, who numbered roughly 1.6 million in 2024, per agency data.
Impact on International Students
The plaintiffs argue that the four-year duration is not long enough to complete many programs, especially at the doctoral level. They claim that international students “must apply for discretionary extensions of stay from an already overwhelmed federal immigration bureaucracy with no certainty that an extension necessary to complete the degree program they have invested in attaining will be granted.”
The regulations also put restrictions on international students changing programs or transferring to other institutions. Additionally, they bar students from beginning a new course of study at the same or lower level as a previously completed program. This, the plaintiffs argue, violates an existing immigration statute by denying visas to a category of students who are “expressly eligible for F student visas under the plain text” of the law.
The plaintiffs believe that the rule will discourage international students from enrolling at U.S. colleges due to “the intolerable prospect of losing lawful immigration status part way through their studies.”
Related: Education Department: 1,900 Colleges Overdue on Data Submissions
Response from the Administration
In an emailed statement, a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said, “Where was the outrage when foreign nationals were abusing the system, violating the terms of their student visas, and making a mockery of our immigration laws?”
However, the plaintiffs argue that the administration’s rule violates regulatory procedures by failing to “adequately quantify and weigh both the costs and the benefits” of the final rule and to fully address the roughly 22,000 comments on the proposal that voiced “near-universal opposition.” The case is currently pending in federal district court in Massachusetts.
NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw said in a statement, “The rule will severely undermine the contributions international students make to U.S. campuses, economies, and national security.” The coalition is seeking to block the implementation of the rule and vacate it, citing the potential harm it could cause to international students and the academic community.
