Tag: Judge

  • Judge pauses Mississippi’s DEI ban at public colleges and schools

    Judge pauses Mississippi’s DEI ban at public colleges and schools

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief: 

    • A federal judge on Sunday temporarily blocked enforcement of major parts of a new Mississippi law that bars diversity, equity and inclusion in the state’s public colleges and K-12 schools. 
    • The American Civil Liberties Union of Mississippi and other organizations filed a lawsuit in June on behalf of students and educators, arguing the new law imposes the state government’s views on race, gender and sexuality on public colleges and schools and censors opposing views
    • In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Henry Wingate pointed to accounts of educators having their programs shut down or censoring their own speech to ensure they don’t run afoul of the law. The accounts signal “possible widespread suppression of speech, programming, and institutional function,” Wingate wrote. 

    Dive Insight: 

    Educator and student groups sued over the law just two months after it took effect in April, arguing the legislation violates their First Amendment right to free speech and is unconstitutionally vague. 

    It is difficult for administrators, teachers, and students to distinguish prohibited actions from permissible ones, making the law particularly susceptible to arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement,” the lawsuit said. 

    One contested aspect of the law is a provision that bans public colleges and K-12 schools from either engaging in or requiring diversity training, which it defines as any formal or informal education meant to increase “awareness or understanding of issues related to race, sex, color, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion or national origin.” 

    This edict applies to both elective or required courses, according to the lawsuit. The plaintiffs warn of dire consequences from the legislation, arguing its provisions would prohibit constitutional law professors from discussing discrimination and history teachers from teaching about the Civil War and slavery

    Under the bill, colleges and K-12 schools also can’t “engage in” eight “divisive concepts” — a provision the lawsuit calls “extremely broad.” One divisive concept, for instance, is that an individual “by virtue of his or her race, sex, color, national origin, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.” 

    The lawsuit argues that could block discussions of implicit bias in sociology, psychology and other classes.

    Public colleges and K-12 schools that don’t follow the law face a steep penalty if they rack up two violations — the potential loss of state funding. Colleges and schools must “cure” their violations to avoid this punishment, though the legislation doesn’t explain how that can be accomplished, sparking concerns that educators will be fired and students will be expelled, according to the lawsuit. 

    The legislation also carves out exceptions for “scholarly research or creative work” by students and employees. But the lawsuit argues those carve-outs are unclear and raise questions about whether students could discuss work on one of the banned concepts during class. 

    “Like other provisions of the act, this exception is vague and further confuses what is and what is not prohibited by the law,” the plaintiffs argued. 

    The defendants include Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, as well as the chairs of the state community college system’s coordinating board and education board, among others. They filed a motion to dismiss earlier this month, arguing that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue and that the attorney general was shielded by sovereign immunity

    However, Wingate wrote that U.S. Supreme Court precedent allows plaintiffs to seek injunctive relief against state officials to prevent constitutional violations.

    The temporary restraining order is in effect until further court order. Wingate is holding a hearing Wednesday over whether to grant a preliminary injunction, which would last until he issues a final ruling on the case. 

    In his ruling, the judge pointed to accounts from educators and students. One plaintiff, a librarian at Hinds Community College, expressed uncertainty about whether she can recommend books on race, gender or identity or curate material for events like Black History Month

    And the director of student development at Tougaloo College said she has suspended programs meant to support LGBTQ+ students out of concern that discussion of gender identity could risk her institution’s funding.

    Since the law took effect in April, institutions have been attempting to follow the legislation, often “erring on the side of caution” by canceling programming that could now be prohibited, Wingate noted. 

    “This Court finds that each day the statute remains unclarified, undefined, and under a threat of open interpretation, exacerbates the suppression of protected speech,” Wingate wrote.

    Source link

  • Judge Says Harvard Can Enroll International Students for Now

    Judge Says Harvard Can Enroll International Students for Now

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | greenleaf123/iStock/Getty Images | APCortizasJr/iStock/Getty Images

    District Judge Allison Burroughs granted a preliminary injunction to Harvard University on Friday in its case challenging the Trump administration’s efforts to prevent the university from enrolling international students. It’s the latest development in a tit-for-tat legal battle over the ability of more than a quarter of Harvard’s students to remain enrolled. 

    The injunction prevents the Department of Homeland Security from stripping Harvard of its Student Exchange and Visitor Program certification until Burroughs issues a final ruling in the lawsuit. It does not address President Donald Trump’s executive proclamation from earlier this month banning the State Department from issuing visas to international students and researchers attending Harvard; a temporary restriction on that ban expired June 20. 

    Burroughs has not issued an injunction on the Trump administration’s second attempt to revoke Harvard’s SEVP certification, which could take effect Wednesday if she declines to take further action, as Harvard has requested. 

    Source link

  • Judge Orders Mahmoud Khalil to Be Released

    Judge Orders Mahmoud Khalil to Be Released

    A federal judge ordered that Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University graduate and student protest leader who was detained by ICE agents in March, be released from a detention center in Louisiana. News outlets reported that he walked out of the detention center around 6:40 Central time Friday evening. 

    U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz ruled on Friday that Khalil, a legal permanent resident who has not been accused of any crime, should be released on bail and that continuing to hold him was highly unusual and could constitute “unconstitutional” punishment for his political beliefs. The Trump administration had sought to keep Khalil imprisoned based on a minor alleged immigration infraction after another judge ruled earlier this month that it could not continue to hold him purely based on the State Department’s claim that his continued presence in the U.S. posed a foreign policy threat. 

    Khalil’s arrest made national headlines and kicked off the Trump administration’s months-long campaign of detentions, visa revocations and threats of deportation against international students.

    Source link

  • Universities Sue, Judge Blocks DOD’s Indirect Costs Cap

    Universities Sue, Judge Blocks DOD’s Indirect Costs Cap

    Johns Hopkins, Arizona State and Cornell Universities are among a coalition of 12 higher education institutions and three trade groups that filed a lawsuit against the Department of Defense on Monday over the agency’s plan to cap universities’ indirect research cost rates at 15 percent. 

    While DOD secretary Pete Hegseth said in a memo last month that the policy is aimed at “accountability” and rooting out “waste,” the lawsuit argues that slashing indirect costs rates “will stop critical research in its tracks, lead to layoffs and cutbacks at universities across the country, badly undermine scientific research at United States universities, and erode our nation’s enviable status as a global leader in scientific research and innovation.”

    On Tuesday, a federal judge in Boston issued a temporary restraining order, prohibiting the DOD from enacting the cap. A hearing in the case is set for July 2. 

    The litigation filed this week is the latest legal challenge universities and their advocates have mounted against the federal government’s attempts to cap the amount of money it gives universities for the indirect costs of conducting federally funded research. The National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and the Department of Energy have all attempted to unilaterally enact similar caps, and federal judges have blocked those efforts for now

    For decades, universities have periodically negotiated with the federal government to calculate bespoke indirect cost reimbursement rates to pay for research costs that support multiple grant-funded projects, such as facilities maintenance, specialized equipment and administrative personnel. Universities factor those rates into their institutional budgets.

    For example, Johns Hopkins and the DOD currently have in place a negotiated indirect cost rate of 55 percent. In 2024 JHU received $32 million from the DOD to cover indirect costs, according to the lawsuit. If the DOD’s plan moves forward, however, the university would lose $22 million. 

    Source link

  • In Quran burning conviction, UK judge uses violence against defendant as evidence of his guilt

    In Quran burning conviction, UK judge uses violence against defendant as evidence of his guilt

    Last year, FIRE launched the Free Speech Dispatch, a regular series covering new and continuing censorship trends and challenges around the world. Our goal is to help readers better understand the global context of free expression. Want to make sure you don’t miss an update? Sign up for our newsletter.


    Return of blasphemy prosecutions feared in the UK 

    On June 2, four months after West London resident Moussa Kadri attacked Kurdish-Armenian asylum seeker Hamit Coskun for burning a Quran, Westminster Magistrates’ Court found Coskun guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence and fined him £240 ($323). 

    Coskun ignited a new round of debate over blasphemy in the UK after burning a Quran outside London’s Turkish consulate and yelling “Fuck Islam” and “Islam is a religion of terrorism,” which he has since repeatedly claimed was a protest against “the Islamist government of Erdoğan,” Turkey’s president. In response, Kadri attacked him with a knife, knocked him to the ground, and kicked him while he was down.

    But there’s a particularly disturbing element to this case. Namely, the judge’s justification for the conviction. The “disorderly” nature of Coskun’s protest, the judge said, “is no better illustrated than by the fact that it led to serious public disorder involving him being assaulted by two different people.” 

    That’s right, a man’s violent attack on another was cited as evidence of the victim’s guilt.

    The UK was not alone in making blasphemy news in recent weeks. In Bangladesh, a 23-year-old was arrested under the country’s Cyber Security Act for “insulting” the Prophet Muhammad on Facebook. An Iranian court upheld a death sentence on blasphemy charges for the musician Tataloo. And Sweden may be facing yet another Quran burning controversy, but appears to be allowing it to proceed — for now.

    Political speech in the crosshairs around the world

    • Mayor Gilles Platret of French city Chalon-sur-Saone banned display of Palestine’s flag in the city this month as well as “all pro-Palestine demonstrations.”
    • Hungary delayed a vote on a bill that would allow punishment including bans on organizations judged to “threaten the sovereignty of Hungary by using foreign funding to influence public life.”
    • Istanbul prosecutors — continuing Turkey’s crusade against imprisoned Istanbul Mayor Ekrem Imamoglu, a rival of President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan — banned use of Imamoglu’s image and audio recordings.
    • Israeli Education Minister Yoav Kisch threatened to revoke funding to universities where students have held Nakba rallies. “Academia is not a platform for incitement under the guise of freedom of expression,” he wrote.
    • Kneecap member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh has been charged with a terrorism offense by the UK Metropolitan Police for displaying a flag supporting Hezbollah at a concert in London last year.
    • The lese-majeste case against American academic Paul Chambers, accused of insulting Thailand’s monarchy, has officially been dropped. Chambers will return to the U.S.
    • Malaysian police are investigating a queer sexual health workshop for “causing disharmony, disunity, or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill-will, or prejudicing the maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion.”
    • Georgian Dream, the ruling party of Georgia, says it’s taking action against “the filthiest phrases and insults” made against its party members from a so-called “externally funded hate speech campaign.”
    • Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad was arrested for social media posts about India’s tensions with Pakistan, including one about “those who are mindlessly advocating for war.”

    Eight year sentence for Brazilian comedian 

    A São Paulo state criminal court sentenced comedian Leo Lins to a whopping eight years and three months in prison for “practicing” or “inciting” racism and religious prejudice as well as for his comments about disabilities. The charges stemmed from a viral 2022 set in which Lins mocked “Black and Indigenous people, obese people, elderly people, gay people, Jews, northeastern Brazilians, evangelicals, disabled people and those with HIV.”

    “When there is a confrontation between the fundamental precept of liberty of expression and the principles of human dignity and judicial equality, the latter should win out,” the judge said of Lins’ sentencing. Lins intends to appeal.

    Free press under attack from Saudi Arabia to El Salvador to Samoa 

    • On June 14, Saudi Arabia executed journalist Turki Al-Jasser on treason and terrorism charges. Al-Jasser’s supporters claim the charges were in retaliation for the journalist’s criticism of Saudi royals. The Committee to Protect Journalists says the international community’s failure to act after Jamal Khashoggi’s murder “emboldened de facto ruler Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to continue his persecution of the press.”

      Jamal Khashoggi’s fiancé Hatice Cengiz looks at his photo as Nihad Awad of CAIR speaks about the murder during a demonstration at the Saudi Embassy, Washington DC, October 2021
    • Staff of an investigative news outlet in El Salvador, El Faro, fled the country in expectation of criminal charges after reporting that President Nayib Bukele’s party “paid gangs a quarter of a million dollars during his 2014 mayoral race for their help getting him votes in communities they controlled.”
    • An Argentinian investigative journalist is accusing the country’s intelligence services of approving a plan that would “allow agents to gather intelligence on journalists, economists, academics and other critics of President Javier Milei and his government.” The government denied the allegation “but acknowledged the existence of the document.”
    • A Kenyan author was arrested after President William Ruto’s daughter accused him of impersonation for writing a book about her without her permission.
    • Samoan journalist Lagi Keresoma was charged under a criminal defamation law over her article about a former police officer’s legal challenges. Press freedom advocates are pushing for the repeal of the criminal defamation statute, rightfully warning of its limits on journalists’ rights.
    • London BBC staff are raising the alarm over the Iranian government’s efforts to intimidate them within the UK, citing a “sharp and deeply troubling escalation” in Iran’s years-long campaign against them. Metropolitan Police said at least 20 people in London have been the target of violence and threats by Iran in recent years.

    The latest news in tech: Porn, bans, and Telegram

    • Six of Brazil’s 11 Supreme Court justices voted in favor of holding tech companies responsible for “illegal” third party content posted to their platforms but specifics on the enforcement and other details are still forthcoming. “We must, as a court, move in the direction of freedom with responsibility and regulated freedom, which is the only true freedom,” one judge said.
    • President Emmanuel Macron has committed to banning social media for children under 15, citing a recent murder in the country. “Platforms have the ability to verify age. Let’s do it,” he said.
    • And Pornhub warned it will no longer be available in France over recent age verification legislation.
    • Porn is a focus of government action in Tanzania, too. Information minister Jerry Silaa announced a block on the platform X over the presence of porn on the site, material he said is contrary to Tanzania’s “laws, culture, customs, and traditions.”
    • Vietnam ordered a block on Telegram, citing “anti-state” material available on the app and legal authority prohibiting “taking advantage of telecommunications activities to oppose the state.”
    • Transparency reports show that in the early months of 2025, Telegram handed law enforcement data on 22,777 users, a major jump from previous disclosures. 

    China’s censorship looks to the past — and abroad

    Unsurprisingly, the 36th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre brought another wave of censorship in Hong Kong, which in previous years was home to mass demonstrations commemorating the date. But now even silent protests are criminalized, and self-censorship has soared. Police made some arrests, including “a man holding an electric candle, a man standing silently in the rain, and two women, including a girl holding flowers and dressed in a school uniform.” 

    Censorship of the Tiananmen anniversary is widespread online, too. Media outlet ABC obtained authorities’ 230-page Tiananmen censorship guide “used by frontline content censors to train artificial intelligence tools to moderate vast amounts of content.” A similar memo warned, “Delete first. Review later.”

    A candlelight vigil outside the Chinese consulate general in Los Angeles to mark the 36th anniversary of the crackdown on the pro-democracy protests in Beijing's Tiananmen Square, June 2025

    A candlelight vigil outside the Chinese consulate general in Los Angeles to mark the 36th anniversary of the crackdown on the pro-democracy protests in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, June 2025

    Amidst the censorship surrounding June 4, other national security-related threats emerged in Hong Kong. Joshua Wong, a pro-democracy activist already serving a nearly five-year prison sentence, was hit with new charges — while beyond bars. This month, he was charged with “conspiring to collude with foreign forces” for allegedly encouraging other nations to impose sanctions on Hong Kong in 2020. And the city’s police are warning residents that they too may face national security charges if they download “secessionist” mobile game Reversed Front: Bonfire, which allows users to play as targeted groups rising against the Chinese Communist Party. Even just recommending the game could qualify as “incitement to secession.”

    Censorship of disfavored political speech isn’t just a problem within China and Hong Kong — critics of the Chinese government face repression on a global scale. At Book World Prague, a Czech book fair, Chinese officials unsuccessfully pressured organizers to remove the Taiwanese flag from a publisher’s booth as well as censor a catalog that mentioned involvement by Taiwan’s Ministry of Culture. And here in the United States, two men, one from China and the other from the UK, are accused of stalking a U.S.-based man in an effort to prevent him from protesting Xi Jinping’s 2023 visit to California.

    Source link

  • Federal Judge Won’t Block Trump’s Cuts to IES

    Federal Judge Won’t Block Trump’s Cuts to IES

    A federal district judge declined to issue an injunction that would block the Trump administration’s recent cuts to staff and contracts at the Institute of Education Sciences—an agency charged with collecting and analyzing data about both K–12 and higher education.

    In an opinion released last week, Maryland judge Stephanie A. Gallagher acknowledged that the new administration has terminated 90 percent of the agency’s staff and therefore IES “is not doing a number of tasks Congress requires of it.” Gallagher, a Trump appointee, also empathized with the two education research associations that filed the lawsuit—the American Educational Research Association and the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness—saying she trusts that not receiving the data they expected from IES “will harm them.” 

    But that does not mean the plaintiffs have a strong enough case to stop the Trump administration from continuing to dismantle the agency. Gallagher said that the associations’ arguments are at times too broad or too narrow, that they lump together numerous cuts—some of which may be justified—and that they include “factual discrepancies” and improper interpretations of “no fewer than a dozen statutes.” 

    Over all, she said, “They have not shown they are entitled to this sort of extraordinary relief.”

    “These Plaintiffs have alleged, and have provided some evidence to support, a troubling pattern of conduct at IES,” Gallagher wrote. “But because they cannot make the requisite showings on the preliminary injunction factors, and in particular have not shown they have standing to seek the relief they are asking for, their motion for a preliminary injunction must be denied.”

    This ruling is not final, however, and “should not be taken as predictive of this Court’s ultimate decision,” Gallagher added.

    But the Education Department is already walking back some of the IES cuts, according to court filings in the lawsuit that The Hechinger Report first reported on. Department officials disclosed earlier this month that they are reinstating at least 20 out of the 101 contracts that were terminated. The restored contracts include one that requires the National Center for Education Statistics to participate in the Program for International Student Assessment. (According to Hechinger, Congress mandates that the department take part in international assessments.)

    SREE president Elizabeth Tipton told Hechinger that the limited reversal was “upsetting” and not enough to fix the problem.

    “They’re trying to make IES as small as they possibly can,” she said.

    Source link

  • Judge Releases Harvard Researcher After Four-Month Detention

    Judge Releases Harvard Researcher After Four-Month Detention

    A judge released a Harvard Medical School research associate and Russian native Thursday. She had been held in federal detention for nearly four months after she tried to re-enter the U.S.

    Kseniia Petrova still faces a criminal charge for allegedly trying to smuggle frog embryos into the country through Boston’s Logan International Airport, where Customs and Border Protection detained her, but she’s been freed for now.

    “I hear it’s sunny. Goodbye,” U.S. magistrate judge Judith G. Dein said after approving Petrova’s release, the Associated Press reported.

    The AP wrote that Petrova, standing outside the John Joseph Moakley U.S. Courthouse in Boston, thanked her supporters, saying, “I never really felt alone any minute when I was in custody, and it’s really helped me very much.”

    The court set a probable cause hearing in the case for next Wednesday.

    Despite being detained Feb. 16 and transferred to Immigration and Customs Enforcement custody in Louisiana, it wasn’t until mid-May that prosecutors announced the smuggling charge. One of her lawyers, Gregory Romanovsky, has said that Petrova “was suddenly transferred from ICE to criminal custody” less than two hours after a judge set a hearing on her release.

    On May 28, a U.S. District Court of Vermont judge said that Petrova’s immigration detention was unjustified and granted bail, but that didn’t immediately lead to her release, NBC News reported.

    “It’s difficult to understand why someone like Kseniia needed to be jailed for four months,” Romanovsky said. “She poses no danger and has deep ties to her community. Her case is a reminder that immigration enforcement should be guided by law and common sense—and not deportation quotas.”

    Source link

  • U.S. Judge Rules Colleges Can Directly Pay Student Athletes

    U.S. Judge Rules Colleges Can Directly Pay Student Athletes

    Michael Reaves/Getty Images 

    Federal district judge Claudia Wilken granted final approval to a multi-billion-dollar settlement in the yearslong House v. NCAA lawsuit late Friday evening, effectively transforming college sports: Starting July 1, institutions will be allowed to pay student athletes directly.

    In accordance with the settlement, the National Collegiate Athletic Association and colleges in Division I conferences will distribute nearly $2.8 billion in back damages over the next 10 years to athletes who competed any time since 2016, as well as to their lawyers. The case also allows each college that opted in to pay their athletes collectively up to $20.5 million per year, in addition to scholarships. That figure will increase incrementally over time.

    The ruling, which technically resolves three antitrust lawsuits against the NCAA, essentially turns student-athletes from amateurs into professionals. But experts say this isn’t likely to end court battles over athletics. The creation of the revenue-sharing model (where schools distribute money earned from areas such as media rights or merchandise), combined with existing turmoil over the regulation of name, image and likeness (NIL) deals, will only invite more lawsuits, they say. 

    “The judge said, in essence, this is not a perfect settlement that solves everyone’s concerns, but it makes progress towards ‘righting the wrongs’ of higher education’s desire to maintain amateurism status for the players but no one else,” Karen Weaver, adjunct assistant professor in the graduate school of education at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed.

    Although many colleges began making changes to their programs in anticipation of the settlement’s approval, the timing of the ruling could present logistical challenges as they move to start revenue-sharing with students from the July 1 deadline set out in the suit. 

    Current and former athletes have celebrated the ruling. 

    “It’s historic,” former college basketball star Sedona Prince, a co-lead plaintiff in one of the lawsuits, told ESPN. “It seemed like this crazy, outlandish idea at the time of what college athletics could and should be like. It was a difficult process at times … but it’s going to change millions of lives for the better.”

    Wild West Yet to be Tamed

    Judge Wilken’s ruling comes nearly two months after both parties presented arguments in early April for approving the settlement, and nearly five years after the suit was first filed in 2020. But contentious debates over how to manage paying student athletes really erupted in 2021, when NIL deals were first legalized. 

    Since then, collectives made up of alumni and boosters have paid athletes millions of dollars to play at schools through unregulated NIL partnerships. Top football and basketball players have earned the most.

    College leaders have argued that the collectives could give wealthier institutions an unfair recruiting advantage. The House settlement, which not only allows colleges to pay athletes directly but also gives conferences the power to regulate booster influence, could help solve that problem.

    “For several years, Division I members crafted well-intentioned rules and systems to govern financial benefits from schools and name, image and likeness opportunities, but the NCAA could not easily enforce these for several reasons,” NCAA president Charlie Baker wrote in a statement Friday. “The result was a sense of chaos: instability for schools, confusion for student-athletes and too often litigation.”

    “The settlement opens a pathway to begin stabilizing college sports,” Baker said. “This new framework that enables schools to provide direct financial benefits to student-athletes and establishes clear and specific rules to regulate third-party NIL agreements marks a huge step forward for college sports.”

    The settlement also establishes a new clearinghouse, run by Deloitte, that will vet any endorsement deal between a booster and an athlete worth more than $600, with the goal of ensuring it is for a “valid business purpose.”  

    Still, doubts remain about how the watchdog will work; one commenter on X noted that all it takes for boosters to create an NIL regulatory loophole is to pay athletes in multiple $599 payments rather than one mass sum

    Despite the efforts to regulate NIL payments through the clearinghouse, Weaver said the settlement will create “a feeding frenzy of agents and dealmakers capitalizing on a few athletes wealth while schools scramble to lock down players who could bolt for a better offer at any moment.”

    “I expect to see the first Title IX lawsuits, and requests for an immediate stay, filed as soon as this week,” she said. “It’s important for higher education leaders to understand the far-reaching impact on our industry—it’s only just begun.”

    Source link

  • Judge blocks Trump’s international enrolment ban

    Judge blocks Trump’s international enrolment ban

    The temporary restraining order (TRO) was issued by federal judge Allison Burroughs on June 5, just one day after President Trump’s signing of a proclamation to suspend the issuing of US visas to international students entering Harvard for an initial six months.   

    During the Massachusetts hearing, Burroughs said Trump’s directive would cause “immediate and irreparable injury” to America’s oldest institution, temporarily blocking it “until there is opportunity to hear from all parties”. 

    The judge also extended a 23 May restraining order which prevents DHS’s attempt to strip Harvard of its ability to enrol international students, until June 20 or when a preliminary injunction is issued, with a hearing set for June 16. 

    The June 4 proclamation came in addition to, and aims to circumvent, DHS secretary Kristi Noem’s revocation of Harvard’s SEVP certification, which was also blocked by the courts.  

    Wednesday’s directive – which incorrectly refers to SEVP as the “Student and Exchange Visa Program” – attempts to bar all new international students, scholars and exchange visitors from pursuing any course of study at the university, for a period of six months. 

    With the stroke of a pen, the DHS Secretary and the President have sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body

    Harvard University

    This time, the government framed the ban as a matter of national security, accusing Harvard of collaborating with China. It has repeatedly criticised the institution for failing to root out antisemitism on campus and failing to hand over information on international students.  

    For its part, hours before judge Burroughs’ ruling, Harvard amended a previous lawsuit, alleging both the June 4 proclamation and the DHS revocation were “part of a concerted and escalating campaign of retaliation by the government” in clear retribution for Harvard’s exercising its First Amendment rights to free speech.  

    “With the stroke of a pen, the DHS Secretary and the President have sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body,” it reads, in what the complaint calls a “government vendetta against Harvard”.  

    Last year, Harvard hosted 6,793 international students, totalling over 27% of the entire student body, though Trump has mistakenly called the figure 31%.

    Meanwhile, on June 5, Harvard’s President Garber sent a letter to the Harvard community, informing students that “contingency plans” were being drawn up to allow students to continue their studies during the summer and the upcoming academic year.

    Reaffirming the “outstanding contributions” of international students, Garber vowed to “celebrate them, support them, and defend their interests as we continue to assert our Constitutional rights”.  

    Source link