US unions sue over new visa rule for foreign students, journalists

Lawsuit challenges new visa limits

A coalition of US unions and advocacy groups has filed a lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts seeking to block a new Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule that would impose fixed time limits on how long foreign students, exchange visitors, and journalists can remain in the country. The rule, published on July 17, 2026, and scheduled to take effect on September 15, replaces the long-standing "duration of status" system—which allowed students to stay as long as they maintained their academic program—with fixed admission periods.

Under the new system, F visa holders (academic students) and J visa holders (exchange visitors) would be admitted for periods of no longer than four years. I visa holders (foreign media and journalists) would be admitted for up to 240 days, or 90 days for Chinese nationals. The lawsuit, filed on August 18, argues the changes would be "catastrophic" for universities, international students, and scholars, discouraging students from coming to the US and causing economic losses.

The plaintiffs include NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, the American Federation of Teachers, and several affiliated unions. The case, assigned to District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV, is formally titled Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration et al. v. US Department of Homeland Security et al. Judge Saylor has set a briefing schedule with the government's response due August 31 and an in-person motion hearing scheduled for September 3 at 11:00 a.m.

Universities advise early return

Several major US universities, including Harvard, Columbia, Ohio State University, Georgetown, George Washington University, and the University of Chicago, have urged international students to return to the US before September 15 to avoid being admitted under the new fixed-date system. Harvard's International Office advised F-1 and J-1 students and scholars to plan travel so they are physically present by that date. Columbia set an earlier target of September 8, while Georgetown's Office of Global Services issued targeted warning letters. George Washington University advised students to check their records around September 15 for new program-end dates, and the University of Chicago held informational webinars on the rule's restrictions.

Students physically present in the US on September 15 and maintaining their status will generally be covered by transition provisions and will not immediately need a new admission period. However, those who leave and re-enter after the effective date could be admitted under the new system and receive a specific end date. Universities are advising students to plan on the assumption that the deadline will remain in force unless a court blocks it.

Impact on students and media

The rule also reduces the post-completion grace period for F-1 students from 60 to 30 days, restricts graduate students from changing academic programs, bars students from pursuing degrees at the same or lower level after completing a prior one, and limits transfers and program changes for undergraduates. Students needing more time will have to apply for a discretionary Extension of Stay through US Citizenship and Immigration Services, with no guarantee of approval.

The plaintiffs argue the rule is "arbitrary and capricious" under the Administrative Procedure Act, contending that DHS's justifications rest on scattered anecdotes rather than evidence of a systemic problem. Their complaint cites research estimating the rule could cost the US economy between $72 billion and $145 billion annually within a decade, with productivity losses of $220–439 billion a year. NAFSA research cited in the complaint suggests every three international students support an additional US job. The plaintiffs also note that DHS received nearly 22,000 public comments on the rule, which they say were largely dismissed with conclusory responses.

Reactions

A DHS spokesperson called the lawsuit "performative" and said the media should thank President Trump for cracking down on "rampant fraud." Jon Schleuss, president of the US NewsGuild-CWA, described the rule as an attack on journalists. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, said the US is "breaking the law for its own political purposes" and using international students as "pawns."

Court timeline

The September 3 hearing is seen as a pivotal date. If the court grants a preliminary injunction, the rule could be delayed or blocked, but if it does not, the rule will take effect as scheduled. The narrow window between the hearing and the effective date leaves little time for a decision either way, adding to uncertainty for students and universities preparing for the fall semester.