A federal judge in Boston stopped the Department of Homeland Security from ending “duration of status” for international students, exchange visitors and foreign journalists, one day before the change was scheduled to take effect.
U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted a preliminary injunction on September 14 in Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. DHS, postponing the effective date of the final rule DHS published on July 17 under Section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act. We covered the rule back when DHS first moved to cap international student stays at four years.
Under the blocked rule, F and J visa holders would have been admitted for four years or the program end date, whichever came first, and I visa holders for 240 days. Students needing longer would have filed a Form I-539 extension request decided at the discretion of a USCIS officer, with no appeal available even inside DHS.
The rule also shortened the departure window from 60 days to 30, barred students from pursuing a second degree at the same or lower level, and restricted transfers between schools. The coalition of colleges and labor unions that sued DHS in August asked the court to throw the rule out entirely.
Why It Matters
Roughly 1.6 million people hold F status and 504,000 hold J status, according to figures DHS itself published in the rule. International students contributed $44 billion to the economy in 2023-24 and directly supported close to 400,000 jobs, one job for every three students, per an economic analysis cited in the record.
Those students also fill seats that American universities increasingly cannot fill any other way, which is why international graduate enrollment losses have already triggered layoffs and program closures on campuses that built budgets around full-pay foreign enrollment.
The damage started before the rule ever took effect. The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee reported a 42% drop in international applications for the current academic year. Those campus numbers track the national trend we covered when international college applications fell 10%, with India down 15% and Ghana down 34%.
What The Court Found
Saylor made clear he was not ruling on whether the policy was smart: “this Court does not have the power to block the rule on the ground that it is misguided or ill-advised.” He ruled on process, and found DHS failed the APA on nearly every front. His treatment of the national security justification was unusually blunt for a district court opinion, and it comes at a time when student visa processing has already drawn bipartisan Senate scrutiny in Congress.
The specifics from the 48-page opinion:
- The security case rested on five anecdotes. DHS pointed to five incidents involving 11 individuals out of tens of millions admitted over four decades. Saylor wrote that the argument “borders on the absurd,” noting a hostile actor could simply operate inside a four-year window or enter on a six-month tourist visa.
- The fraud case did not add up either. DHS flagged 77,000 F-1 students who spent more than 10 years in student status since 2003, under 5% of the total, without explaining why a decade in school is suspicious when doctoral programs run nearly six years on median.
- Journalists got no justification at all. The court found DHS offered no national security evidence, no fraud evidence and no reasoned explanation for capping I visas at 240 days.
- Cost analysis treated harm as zero. DHS called enrollment effects “unquantifiable” and then effectively priced them at zero, even as it conceded first-year compliance costs near $268 million and roughly 135 hours of work per school official.
- The comment record was dismissed wholesale. About 22,000 comments arrived during a 32-day window the court called “exceptionally short, and barely legal.” DHS waved off the objections as “speculative.”
One rejected DHS response drew particular attention. The comment highlighted that the rule would cost American universities the strongest applicants available anywhere, but the agency wrote a reponse that schools “may be able to fill vacancies left by nonimmigrant students who choose not to enroll with other qualified applicants.” Judge Saylor called the idea that MIT and Harvard graduate researchers are fungible “not a rational response to a legitimate concern.”
The scope of relief is the part immigration attorneys will argue over. DHS urged the court to limit any order to the named plaintiffs under Trump v. CASA, the 2025 Supreme Court decision curbing universal injunctions. Saylor held that APA Section 705 authority is separate from traditional equitable power, citing a First Circuit decision from August, and ruled that a party-specific order would force parallel regulatory regimes across more than 5,000 institutions while students move between schools and pursue joint degrees.
He granted the postponement nationwide but denied outright vacatur.
How This Connects
The higher education system has been absorbing enrollment shocks for three straight years, and international students have been ta key point of concern. International students typically pay full price at colleges, and that revenue stream is essential for college operations.
Syracuse University acknowledged its first budget deficit in years after missing 2026 enrollment targets, and our running count of college closures and mergers in 2026 keeps growing. A four-year international student enrollment cap landing on top of that math is why 600 institutions signed on to fight it rather than wait out the litigation.
What’s Next
The next status conference is set for October 2, and DHS can appeal the injunction to the First Circuit. Duration of status stays in force in the meantime, so students already in F, J or I status keep their current terms and schools do not need to rebuild compliance systems yet.
Anyone thinking about a U.S. program for 2027 should treat the four-year cap as paused rather than dead, and price international student loan options and graduate school borrowing against a timeline that could still change.
Robert Farrington is the founder of The College Investor and is widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading voices on student loan debt and saving for college. He holds an MBA from UC San Diego Rady School of Management and has spent over 15 years researching, writing, and advising on student loans, 529 plans, financial aid programs, and saving and investing for young professionals.
Robert has been featured in the The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, NBC News, and Forbes, where he has been a regular personal finance contributor for over a decade. His work combines both professional expertise and personal experience – he successfully navigated his own student loan repayment journey and has helped thousands of readers do the same.
He is committed to making the intersection of personal finance and education transparent and accessible. You can learn more about Robert on the About Page or on his personal site RobertFarrington.com.
