Judge Blocks Trump’s Attempt to Bar Harvard from Hosting International Students

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a significant regulatory milestone in a long-term confrontation between Harvard University and the federal government, a federal judge Friday decided to retrain the Trump administration from taking steps that might wipe out the Ivy League’s representation of the international students.

The decree was issued by U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston and implies a temporary condition that is in place to the extent of resolving the case by the court, whether Harvard’s intention is sufficiently clearly articulated. Albeit it has some shortcomings in the legality of admitting to Harvard’s wishes, it is a clear response against the university’s allegations of a politically motivated crackdown.

What caused this very decision-making process was a decision by the Department of Homeland Security that came out of the blue to withdraw Harvard’s right to admit foreign students and take care of their visas. That step, in its turn, would have made some 7,000 students leave the country, constituting about 25% of Harvard’s student community, and it would have placed the barrier for international applicants to enter the U.S. Besides the lawsuit against DHS in May, calling the action “illegal retaliation” for the university’s refusal to follow the White House’s instructions in various areas from protests to hiring the case is one that is not settled yet.

Judge Burroughs made an early reaction to the case filed by the university and took a provisional provision to limit the White House’s actions. Early in June, Donald Trump, the former President, tried again, this time by issuing a presidential decree which was aimed at prohibiting international students from entering the country legally under the false excuse that they had long been such a barrier to assimilation of U.S. citizens. The answer of Harvard was the filing of another lawsuit, which explained that the government was rather going to save the face, thus declining to so directly challenge the judge’s earlier decision. Burroughs took care of that too; and even though she did not speak to it directly in Friday’s order, the prohibition of going in that way still lasts.

Harvard, in their message to foreign students following the judge’s ruling, said, “We are hopeful that a more permanent decision will be planned for next week by the judge.” Moreover, the college has assured students of its readiness to implement several alternative strategies of the highest quality. In any event of another iteration of visa restrictions, the academic fate of the students will not be left to chance.

Even so, the uncertainty had been really impactful. The lawyers of Harvard are said to have characterized the situation on campus as a state of “profound fear, concern, and confusion.” That same group of students had been giving some thought to the option of being transferred in the case that they were not certain of their legal staying in the United States or simply if they could have the country’s permit in time for their programs. A girl admitted to the college hailing from China, whose name was solely mentioned as Huang, stated that in a chat on social media she, who had appeared for an interview a few weeks earlier, was still uncertain when she still had her documents held in a waiting status, owing to a supposedly very slow process due to the court decision. She ended with, “Why is it so hard to attend school?” displaying her immense anger and dissatisfaction with the ongoing situation.

The animosity between Harvard and the Trump administration has, over the last few months, become even more pronounced. The actions of the White House, which led to reducing research grants of the university by over $2.6 billion, accusing the institution of illegal activities and threatening the tax-free status of the institution, and requiring a list of all international students who are suspected of illegal activities, were examples of their hostility to Harvard. Although Harvard gave a list of its international students to the government, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, declared that it was an insufficient response and withdrew the university’s certification at the end of May.

The consequences, according to Harvard, had a twofold nature: the name of the university was tainted worldwide, and also its power to attract top talent had vastly decreased. It was Harvard itself that revealed the truth in their lawsuit saying, “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.”

Conversely, President Trump had an alternative perspective. He posted on Truth Social and stated that the government was collaborating with Harvard “to solve their larcenously large blame issues” and suggested the possibility of an agreement. “They give off the impression they are on the right path,” he commentedyet .

Nonetheless, Harvard showed its confidence in its principles. Besides that the university representatives admitted they had solved a few problems like antisemitism repeating, President Alan Garber was clear and determined that the university would never compromise on the basic principles of the freedom of speech and academic independence.

At the moment, students from other nations who are studying in Harvard can at least temporarily relax about the whole issue -note that there are still many judicial litigations to be resolved.