Tag: intl

  • courts intensify effort to block Trump’s int’l enrolment ban

    courts intensify effort to block Trump’s int’l enrolment ban

    • District judge moves to take out an injunction on Trump administration’s Harvard international enrolment ban while the case moves through the legal system.
    • University’s international students report “emotional distress” as many cancel travel plans over fears they will not be allowed back into the US.
    • US Department of Homeland Security boss accuses Harvard of “disdain” for American people and spreading hate.

    Following on from her decision last week to temporarily block the move, district judge Allison Burroughs told a packed court that she wanted to “maintain the status quo” while Harvard’s case works its way through the legal system.

    It’s the latest twist in the university’s ongoing battle with the Trump administration, which has accused it of anti-semitism and stripped it of billions of dollars in funding. For its part, Harvard is coming out swinging against the directive, swiftly mounting a legal challenge – the latest step of which culminated in Burroughs’ judgement in a hearing yesterday.

    In court documents filed ahead of the hearing, Harvard’s director of immigration services at the institution’s international office, Maureen Martin, detailed the toll that the administration’s announcement is taking on the campus’s international students.

    She wrote that the revocation notice has caused both students and faculty to express “profound fear, concern, and confusion” – with the university “inundated” with queries from worried international students.

    “Many international students and scholars are reporting significant emotional distress that is affecting their mental health and making it difficult to focus on their studies,” said Martin, adding that some are too afraid to attend their own graduation ceremonies this week in case immigration-related action is taken against them.

    Meanwhile, others are cancelling international travel plans over concerns they will not be able to re-enter the US. “Some fear being compelled to return
    abruptly to home countries where they might not be safe due to ongoing conflicts or where they could face persecution based on their identity or background,” Martin wrote.

    Many international students and scholars are reporting significant emotional distress that is affecting their mental health and making it difficult to focus on their studies
    Maureen Martin, Harvard University

    While US stakeholders may be breathing a sigh of relief at Harvard’s temporary reprieve, Donald Trump’s government is showing no signs of backing down.

    In a letter sent to Harvard before Thursday’s hearing, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) confirmed that it wanted to move ahead with revoking the university’s SEVP certification, which would mean it could no longer host international students. Notably, though, the letter did not repeat last week’s assertion that Harvard would have 30 days to challenge the decision and suggested the government would not look to immediately enact the directive.

    In a statement released yesterday, US secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, doubled down on accusations that Harvard has not complied with SEVP regulations, has “encouraged and allowed anti-semitic and anti-American violence to rage on its campus” and has been working with the Chinese Communist Party.

    “Harvard’s refusal to comply with SEVP oversight was the latest evidence that it disdains the American people and takes for granted US taxpayer benefits,” she said. “Following our letter to Harvard, the school attempted to claim it now wishes to comply with SEVP standards. We continue to reject Harvard’s repeated pattern of endangering its students and spreading American hate – it must change its ways in order to participate in American programs.”

    Harvard’s row with the Trump administration stems from the stand it took against a raft of government demands, including that it reform its admissions and hiring practices to combat antisemitism on campus, end DEI initiatives and hand over reports on international students.

    When the institution refused to comply with the demands, the government – seemingly in retaliation – froze $2.2 billion in the university’s funding, threatened to revoke its tax-exempt status, and demanded that international students’ records be handed over. If Harvard didn’t play ball, it was warned, it risked losing its SEVP certification. 

    Although Harvard did send over some student information on April 30, and maintained that it had provided the information it was legally bound to supply, this seems to have been insufficient for the Trump administration, which then moved to black the institution from hosting international students.

    In yet another blow to the US international education sector, the US government announced this week that it would pause all new study visa interviews at American consulates around the world – sparking dismay from stakeholders.

    And Chinese students studying in the US were plunged into uncertainty yesterday after – amid a trade war with Beijing – the government announced plans to “aggressively revoke” their visas. As yet, it remains unclear whether all Chinese students will be affected or just those with links to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in so-called key areas.

    Source link

  • State Dept. to Expand Social Media Screening for Intl. Students

    State Dept. to Expand Social Media Screening for Intl. Students

    The plans to expand social media screening, first reported by Politico, were outlined in a memo sent by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

    John McDonnell/Getty Images

    The Trump administration is planning to implement a policy that would require all student visa applicants to undergo social media vetting, according to a cable sent by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Politico reported Tuesday. All new student visa interviews have been paused in preparation for the new policy.

    “The Department is conducting a review of existing operations and process for screening and vetting of student and exchange visitor (F, M, J) visa applicants, and based on that review, plans to issue guidance on expanded social media vetting for all such applicants,” the memo reads, according to a copy published in full on social media by independent journalist Marisa Kabas.

    The planned changes come amid the federal government’s ongoing attacks on student visa holders, which began in March with the detention of multiple students and recent graduates who had been involved in pro-Palestinian protests on their campuses. Shortly after, the administration terminated thousands of student visa holders’ records in the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System, the database the houses international students’ records, leading to a slew of legal actions from students who feared they wouldn’t be able to continue studying in the U.S.

    Most recently, the Trump administration announced last week that it would prohibit Harvard University from enrolling international students as punishment for allegedly failing to prevent antisemitism and harassment on campus during last year’s pro-Palestinian encampments. Though that action was quickly blocked by a judge, the move could be devastating for the Ivy League institution, where international students make up more than a quarter of the student body.

    The proposed policy would increase the amount of time, manpower and resources required to process visa applications, according to experts.

    Faye Kolly, an immigration attorney based in Texas, noted that it’s not unusual for immigration officials to review visa applicants’ social media profiles, which they are required to list on certain immigration forms. But the administration has begun specifically screening the social media accounts of some returning students with visas who had participated in pro-Palestinian campus protests, though Politico reported that State Department officials had found the guidance on how to complete those screenings vague.

    It is not clear how this expanded vetting process will unfold; Rubio included no details in the memo, which said further guidance would be disseminated in the coming days. Though the memo didn’t say as much, Kolly predicted that the extra screening will involve looking “at [applicants’] social media handles more closely for what I’m assuming is going to be speech that could be considered either anti-Israel or pro-Gaza.”

    International education advocates have sounded the alarm on the proposed policy, arguing that it limits prospective students’ right to free expression and illustrates the Trump administration’s devaluation and distrust of international students.

    Fanta Aw, the CEO of NAFSA, an association for international educators, told Politico, “The idea that the embassies have the time, the capacity and taxpayer dollars are being spent this way is very problematic. International students are not a threat to this country. If anything, they’re an incredible asset to this country.”

    Kolly told Inside Higher Ed that the move harks back to the SEVIS terminations in March and April. Both actions, she said, indicate the administration’s lack “of nuance … regarding international students. It’s [taking] a simplistic approach to a very complex issue. When you target international students en masse, it’s irresponsible.”

    Daryl Bish, the president of EnglishUSA, which represents all English language programs in the country, said the change will reverse recent progress on the visa approval process and have an “immediate impact” on enrollment in English language programs.

    “The extraordinary decision to pause visa interviews, under the guise of security and enhanced vetting, is a dangerous precedent that will have immediate short-term consequences,” Bish said. “Visa appointment wait times have, generally, improved since the pandemic. This means that many students apply for the visa close to their program start date. The pause in interviews, if protracted, will force these students to change their plans.”

    Elora Mukherjee, a law professor at Columbia University and the director of the law school’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, also criticized the government for pausing new student visa interviews in the interim—especially as the memo gave no indication of how long the pause might last.

    “The pause is destructive to our national interests and America’s reputation in the world, and its effects may be felt for years. It has thrown the lives of tens of thousands of prospective international students into turmoil and will cause chaos and disruption at colleges and universities across the country. International students have been preparing for months to join U.S. colleges and universities in the fall, and schools have been preparing to welcome them,” she wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed.

    “It is unclear how long the ‘pause’ will be in place, what heightened scrutiny visa applicants will face once the pause is lifted, and the extent to which decisions about granting visas may be tainted by prejudices based on race, religion, and national origin.”

    Source link

  • Trump threatens Harvard’s ability to host int’l students 

    Trump threatens Harvard’s ability to host int’l students 

    US homeland security secretary Kristi Noem has written a “scathing letter” to Harvard University, demanding it submits records of international students’ “illegal and violent activities” by April 30, or face losing its eligibility to enrol student visa holders.

    In Noem’s April 16 statement, she accused Harvard’s “spineless leadership” of “bending the knee to antisemitism” and “threatening national security”. 

    “Harvard’s position as a top institution of higher learning is a distant memory,” she added, cancelling two department of homeland security (DHS) grants worth USD $2.7 million on the basis that the university was “unfit to be entrusted with taxpayer dollars”.  

    DHS is threatening to strip Harvard of its Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification, which allows colleges and universities to issue forms to admitted international students to use in their US visa applications. 

    The punitive measures are the latest in a dispute between Trump and the country’s oldest university, which saw USD $2.2bn in federal funding frozen after it rebuffed government demands, including reporting on international students and ending DEI policies. 

    What’s more, President Trump threatened on April 15 to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status over its “radical ideology”. 

    The University will not surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights

    Alan Garber, Harvard University

    Last year, Harvard hosted 6,793 international students, totalling over 27% of the entire student body.  

    Across the country, more than a million international students attend US colleges every year, contributing $50bn to the economy, as previously reported by The PIE News. 

    The DHS letter – seen by the Harvard Crimson student newspaper – accused Harvard of creating a “hostile learning environment” for Jewish students and reminded the university it was “a privilege to have foreign students attend Harvard University, not a guarantee”.  

    Refusing to submit to the government’s previous demands, Harvard president Alan Garber said the university was committed to tackling antisemitism but maintained it would not “surrender its independence or relinquish its constitutional rights.”  

    “[The administration’s prescription] violates Harvard’s First Amendment rights and exceeds the statutory limits of the government’s authority,” Garber wrote in a message to the community.  

    In light of the recent escalation over SEVP certification, the university has maintained its position that it will not cede to government control, according to the Washington Post.  

    Alongside enhanced scrutiny of teaching, the government is requiring that Harvard reports on international students “supportive of terrorism or antisemitism” and those “hostile to American values”, ban all clubs supporting Palestine, and ban mask-wearing on campus, among other measures.  

    The directives largely stem from two of Trump’s early Executive Orders relating to “protecting the US from terrorism” and “combatting antisemitism”, which have led to over 1,320 international student visa revocations as of April 16, according to Inside Higher Ed.  

    Of this figure, 12 Harvard students and alumni have had their visas cancelled, though the university was not made aware of the rationale behind the revocations.  

    Student visas have been revoked for a variety of reasons, including some minor traffic infractions. Most of the high-profile cases involve students that participated in pro-Palestinian activism.  

    Challenges to the Trump administration have gained traction in recent weeks, with 19 states and 86 institutions supporting a legal challenge against the government’s revocation of student visas, led by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP).  

    Former President Obama, a Harvard alum, expressed his support for the university in a post on X, describing the government’s funding freeze an “unlawful and ham-handed attempt to stifle academic freedom”, urging other institutions to “follow suit”.

    Meanwhile, hundreds of Yale faculty members have published a letter asking its leadership to legally challenge “unlawful demands that threaten academic freedom and university self-governance”.

    Source link

  • What next for int’l education after South Korea’s political crisis?

    What next for int’l education after South Korea’s political crisis?

    On April 4, 2025, South Korea’s Constitutional Court upheld the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol, marking a historic conclusion to 122 days of political turmoil triggered by his failed declaration of martial law on December 3, 2024.

    However, the damage sustained during the transitionary period proved irreversible. Massive public protests, legal battles, sharply divided public opinion, and a temporary presidential suspension culminated in Yoon’s permanent removal from office.

    This article examines how the political crisis has disrupted international higher education in South Korea, focusing on five key areas: reputational damage, impact on students from Asia and the Global South, rising xenophobia, heightened student anxiety, and the sidelining of education policy.

    A blow to Korea’s brand

    Before the political crisis of late 2024, Korea had successfully positioned itself as one of Asia’s most attractive destinations for international students, combining strong government support, cultural appeal through the Korea’s soft power, and a reputation for safety and modernity.

    The country’s international student population had surged to over 200,000 by mid-2024, driven by initiatives like the Study Korea 300K strategy and bolstered by perceptions of national stability.

    However, Yoon’s abrupt declaration of martial law and the ensuing constitutional crisis shattered this image. International media coverage of soldiers surrounding parliament and global expressions of concern drew unsettling comparisons to authoritarian eras, eroding the confidence that had fuelled South Korea’s internationalisation drive. While little direct harm came to students, the perception of fragility alone risks deterring future enrolments.

    Disruptions for the global south

    The political crisis affected international students from Asia and the Global South, who make up the vast majority of the country’s foreign enrolment.

    With countries like China, Vietnam, Mongolia, and Uzbekistan sending thousands annually, students were drawn by proximity, affordability, and opportunity – but instead found themselves facing uncertainty, confusion, and fear.

    The brief but shocking declaration of martial law raised urgent concerns about campus safety, academic continuity, and visa stability, prompting embassies and international offices to issue advisories and support measures.

    Although campuses largely remained operational, the prolonged instability created bureaucratic delays, disrupted programs, and heightened anxiety, especially for students from politically sensitive backgrounds. The overall experience tested students’ faith in Korea as a stable destination.

    Polarisation and the rise of xenophobia

    The political crisis intensified domestic polarisation and spilled over into rising xenophobia, particularly targeting Chinese nationals. Fueled by conspiracy theories and nationalist rhetoric, Yoon’s supporters alleged foreign interference in South Korean politics, echoing fringe narratives prevalent among far-right media.

    These claims, amplified by partisan outlets and street rallies, created an atmosphere of suspicion and scapegoating against a narrowly profiled demographic. While many South Koreans rejected these xenophobic narratives, the episode revealed how quickly foreign students can become collateral damage in domestic political conflicts.

    Heightened anxiety and mental health concerns

    Over the past four months, international students in South Korea have faced heightened anxiety as political turmoil compounded the usual challenges of studying abroad. The situation introduced fears ranging from immediate safety during protests to long-term worries about academic continuity, visa stability, and career prospects.

    International students in South Korea have faced heightened anxiety as political turmoil compounded the usual challenges of studying abroad

    Many students, especially those unfamiliar with Korea’s political system or fluent only in limited Korean language, struggled to interpret rapidly unfolding events, and some even began contingency planning in case of campus closures or evacuation.

    Mental health stressors were exacerbated by long-distance concerns from worried families, unfamiliar political polarisation, and rising xenophobia.

    Higher education policy and discourse sidelined

    Most importantly, national discourse on higher education was effectively sidelined as government attention and public debate fixated on the impeachment process.

    While some initiatives, like the IEQAS certification and the Glocal Project, quietly moved forward, they received minimal coverage or engagement. The leadership vacuum and political paralysis delayed or derailed potential reforms, only resulting in many schools’ collective move to raise tuition fees after a 16-year freeze.

    Within universities, students and faculty who might normally advocate for education policy were drawn into the political fray, and civil discourse on educational development disappeared from the national agenda.

    International education standpoint

    From an international education perspective, the crisis tarnishes South Korea’s branding as a rising study destination.

    The martial law incident and subsequent impeachment chaos created precisely the kind of uncertainty that can give students and parents pause. For example, Hong Kong experienced a notable challenge in international student interest after the protest upheavals of 2019/20, as safety and political issues became a concern.

    No expert in this field would overlook the fact that one of the most powerful drivers of human migration is the political and social compatibility between home and host countries. This helps explain why Korea and Japan have become two of the most attractive destinations for international students in Asia.

    Looking ahead: time for rebuilding

    With the Constitutional Court having issued its ruling, the path to restoring its global reputation hinges on reaffirming its commitment to inclusion, transparency, and predictability. The crisis has illuminated how deeply political instability can affect international education and serves as a cautionary example for emerging study destinations: preserving democratic norms and open societies is essential to sustaining trust and long-term progress in the global arena.

    Rebuilding Korea’s global education brand will require more than a return to stability; it will necessitate deliberate reassurances of democratic resilience, institutional integrity, and a sustained commitment to providing a safe, welcoming environment for international students.

    On the bright side, the decision, grounded in constitutional procedure, stands as a testament to the resilience and maturity of Korea’s democratic institutions

    On the bright side, the decision, grounded in constitutional procedure, stands as a testament to the resilience and maturity of Korea’s democratic institutions. Despite the turbulence, the peaceful and lawful resolution of the crisis reaffirms the country’s enduring commitment to the rule of law, institutional checks and balances, and civic accountability.

    For international observers and students alike, this outcome offers a renewed sense of confidence that Korea’s democratic foundations remain robust. As such, it opens the door for a more transparent and inclusive national recovery, one where education, international engagement, and democratic integrity can move forward together.

    All in all, on the heels of the impeachment, restoring confidence in the national system and reviving the momentum of internationalisation and higher education reform must become a central national priority.

    Source link