The U.S. federal government has implemented new criteria under which international students may lose their legal status, a move that has heightened fears of deportation among many students. This initiative is a part of a larger effort by the current administration to tighten immigration controls. Immigration lawyers argue that these new guidelines facilitate faster deportations and validate prior government actions that abruptly canceled foreign students’ study permissions earlier this year.
Following unexpected revocations of their legal status, students across the U.S. challenged these actions in federal courts, and in several cases, judges ruled that the government had not adhered to due process. In response, the government announced plans to issue fresh guidelines on the criteria for canceling a student’s legal status. According to a document from Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), reasons for status cancellation now encompass the revocation of student visas, a measure that had previously allowed students to remain in the U.S. to complete their studies even if they couldn’t re-enter once they left.
Immigration lawyer Brad Banias criticized this expanded authority, stating that the new guidelines significantly increase ICE’s power. Previously, the revocation of a visa wasn’t a sufficient reason to end a student’s right to be in the U.S. During the past month, many foreign students were alarmed to find their records deleted from the ICE-managed student database. Faced with the prospect of deportation, some students chose to go into hiding or returned home, abandoning their educational pursuits.
With growing legal opposition to these actions, the federal government announced it would restore the legal status of international students as they formulated a new framework for dealing with future cases. However, the new policy soon surfaced in court documents, allowing student status to be revoked if their names appear in criminal or fingerprint databases. Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney in Atlanta, representing numerous students affected by this policy change, noted the government’s attempt to retroactively legalize prior wrongful actions.
Many students who had their visas revoked or who lost their legal status reported having only minor infractions on their records, such as traffic violations. Some students were unclear why they were targeted in the first place. During a court hearing for Akshar Patel, an international student at a Texas university, government lawyers revealed the names of student visa holders were cross-checked with a large database managed by the FBI. This database lists individuals related to criminal activities, including those never formally charged.
In total, approximately 6,400 students were flagged during the database cross-check, one of whom was Patel. His charge of reckless driving from 2018, although later dropped, still appeared in the system. Patel’s name was part of a list sent to a Homeland Security official, who then issued a directive to terminate these records within the student information database.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes pointed out that the expedited timeframe suggested individual records were not reviewed to determine why students were flagged in the database. She criticized the government’s lack of concern for the affected students, who had entered the U.S. legally. Additionally, the State Department has been involved in withdrawing visas, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio saying some cancellations were linked to student involvement in protests deemed contrary to U.S. interests. However, he admitted that some cancellations were unrelated to any demonstrations, being instead associated with potential criminal activities.
In March, Rubio outlined a new standard, arguing that if they had the same information about a student beforehand, a visa would not have been granted. This shift has exacerbated chaos and uncertainty within university campuses nationwide as institutions rushed to warn affected students to halt their studies or work to avoid deportation. Initially, changes in the foreign student database did not indicate a loss of legal standing, with government attorneys suggesting it functioned as an “investigative red flag.”
Andre Watson from the Department of Homeland Security confirmed in the Patel case that despite a “failure to maintain status” designation, Patel was legally present and not subject to immediate deportation. Judge Reyes decided against issuing a preliminary injunction, instead urging both parties to reach a mutual settlement to allow Patel to remain in the U.S.