Groups challenge rule ending Duration of Status

Multiple organizations filed a complaint and a motion for preliminary injunction challenging the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) final rule ending the Duration of Status (D/S) framework for international students, exchange visitors and representatives of foreign media in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Tuesday.

The complaint argues that DHS failed to adequately assess its costs and benefits, meaningfully respond to public comments, consider less burdensome alternatives or justify the rule based on its stated objectives.

The lawsuit also alleges that DHS provided an inadequate public comment period and exceeded its statutory authority.

DHS gave the public 32 days and drew 22,000 comments, including opposition from more than 30 Congress members. Despite there being more comments opposing the changes, DHS enacted the new rule, which is scheduled to take effect on Sept 15.

Fanta Aw, executive director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, said this decision is "a solution in search of a problem".

"The rule will severely undermine the contributions international students make to US campuses, economies and national security," Aw said in a statement. "After carefully reviewing the final rule and the sweeping harm it will cause to our national interest, it is clear that litigation is warranted and necessary."

For about half a century, F-1 students and J-1 visitors could remain in the US for as long as they are enrolled in an academic program with no fixed departure date.

Under the new rule, international students will be given a specific end date aligning with the academic program length or four years, whichever is shorter. For longer programs, the students are required to file an extension of stay.

In addition, F-1 undergraduate students won't be able to change their major or transfer to another college in the first year. They can't pursue another major at the same or lower education level after graduation.

F-1 graduate students are prohibited from switching majors or schools at all, and the duration of F-1 students for English learning will be limited to 24 months in aggregate.

"The new restriction doesn't make any sense," Liu, an art student in Chicago who wants to be identified by his last name only, told China Daily. "An arts degree usually stops at master's level. Serious art students often pursue another master's degree in a different medium to expand their horizon for creativity."

Dual degrees are not uncommon in many fields, Liu said.

For example, research physicians often pursue both MD and PhD to treat patients and run research labs. Jobs in bioinformatics require training in both biology and computer science. Architecture design often benefits from engineering training.

The lawsuit argued that a four-year fixed term is incompatible with many programs, particularly PhDs.

NAFSA estimated that "the median years to a research doctorate is 5.7 years from entering a program to completion, while those who complete the master's/doctorate sequence take an average of 7.3 years from entering graduate school to completion".

Such restrictions are very off-putting. A survey by NAFSA and The Institute for Progress showed that 49 percent of current international students would not have studied in the US without D/S.

College application platform Common App showed that international applicants were down by 9 percent for this fall semester. Many universities are expecting a steep drop in international graduate students.

Miriam Feldblum, president and CEO of the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, said these changes ignore "actual program lengths or students' educational needs" and shift "academic decisions from institutions to immigration officials".

"The rule will disrupt educational pathways, impose significant new burdens on colleges and universities, and make the United States less competitive as the premier destination for global talent," Feldblum said.

The lawsuit said many commenters warned that declining international enrollment would be catastrophic.

"Many cited the Clemens study, which estimated that within ten years, the economic costs of eliminating D/S would be $72-145 billion annually," it said in the court document.

The new rule would also limit I visa holders — representatives of foreign information media — to a maximum of 240 days. For Chinese passport holders, it's much shorter at 90 days.

The lawsuit said that many are concerned that the new rule requiring international journalists to file frequent extension of stay requests would put government officials in a position to punish journalists for exercising their First Amendment rights.