Trump administration restores 20 revoked visas to international students in St. Louis
The Trump administration began restoring the terminated registrations after multiple recent lawsuits against the administration, including two filed recently from students across the state of Missouri.
The lawsuits are one of many across the country, as over 900 students at more than 128 colleges and universities have had their visas revoked or legal status recently terminated with little to no notice, according to the Associated Press.
Federal charges filed in well-known Wildwood cat-hoarding case
Webster University told FOX 2 that 20 of their undergraduate students whose visas had been revoked were restored, including an additional six students at their San Antonio, Texas campus.
'We remain deeply committed to supporting our students and are continuing to monitor this evolving situation closely, working individually with students as needed,' said Tim Keane, Webster University's chancellor, in a statement to the school.
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville also became aware that beginning April 4, the student visas had been revoked of three undergraduates and six former graduates enrolled in their optional practical training program.
SIUE has not released an update on whether these students' visas have been restored.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
13 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
Trump isn't Indiana lawmakers' boss. They should tell him so on redistricting.
When I was hired to run the state's mental health and addiction work, my daughter was 4 years old, and boy was she confused. 'Are you the governor?' she asked. 'No, I'm not the governor, but I work for him.' That made sense for a moment. But then came the follow-up: 'Doesn't everyone in Indiana work for the Governor?' No, I explained, the governor actually works for all of us. 'Oh, okay,' she said. Then she thought a little longer and asked about the president. 'Does the governor work for the president?' 'No,' I said. 'The governor serves the people of Indiana. And this particular president, well, he sort of works for himself.' Eventually she got it, though during my time at the state she would still complain about people littering and ask why I didn't do something about it. But, in general, she understood: I worked for Gov. Eric Holcomb, and he worked for the people of Indiana. We often collaborated with the federal government, but they were not our bosses. Why do I bring up this story, besides the fact that it's adorable (which, honestly, might be reason enough)? Because I'd like to remind our Republican state legislators that Donald Trump is not, in fact, their boss. The backdrop for this, of course, is the ongoing pressure campaign from the Trump administration on red states to redraw districts mid-decade in a bid to secure a GOP House majority in 2026. Governor Braun and Indiana's legislative leaders clearly don't want to participate, but they haven't ruled it out. Indiana is already heavily gerrymandered. Republicans hold 78% (7 of 9) U.S. House seats in a state where they usually get about 60% of the vote. National attention is focused on flipping Rep. Frank Mrvan's seat in Northwest Indiana, and maybe even Rep. André Carson's in Indianapolis, despite both incumbents winning reelection by healthy margins in 2022 and 2024. Of course, gerrymandering happens in red, blue, and purple states alike. It's a kind of tolerated cheating, part of the 'unwritten rules' of politics. But like in baseball, the system's balance depends on everyone knowing which lines not to cross. What makes this redistricting push especially dangerous is that it represents the final form of the worst political trend of the last 10-15 years: the nationalization of state and local politics. The gravitational pull of Washington has hollowed out the traditional role of governors and legislatures as problem-solvers for their own states. Instead, every fight gets reframed as a proxy war in the national culture struggle. The 2024 Indiana GOP gubernatorial primary is a perfect example. That race was dominated by national, culture-war coded topics: the 'war on woke,' virtue signaling about trans athletes, or border enforcement in a state that is hundreds of miles from the closest border. That is why Trump's allies think they can dictate Indiana's maps. But resistance, right now, would be timely, brave, and necessary pushback against this insidious trend and a chance to remind voters that Indiana's leaders should answer to Indiana, not to a fading national figure. The unwritten rule of American politics has been that districts are redrawn after every decennial census, in a manner that may advance partisan goals. It's actually a fairly elegant agreement: count the people, draw districts, and redo it after the next count. This norm keeps the system from being brutalized by a would-be dictator in pursuit of raw power, while acknowledging the reality that political actors will pursue political goals. Our legislators understand this, which is why they don't want to do it. Here's the thing, and it is really the only thing that matters: they don't have to do it. This decision belongs entirely to Indiana's legislature. Like I told my daughter: Donald Trump is not their boss. The only tool MAGA has is political pressure, and if you take a closer look, there's a decent case for not bending the knee. Very soon, Trump will be a lame-duck president, likely presiding over a recession. And like an aging NFL wide receiver (remember the Andre Johnson year with the Colts, woof), his decline will probably be sudden and striking, not gradual. If you're an elected Republican, this is exactly the moment to create daylight between yourself and Trump. You have a clear moral case, and a strong practical one, since this amounts to threatening decades of statewide dominance for maybe one more congressional seat. Yes, they can threaten to primary you, but can they really primary all of you? That's a bluff worth calling, because they cannot be allowed to win this one. Yes, Trump Derangement Syndrome is a real thing. Yes, Trump's opponents have cried fascism so often that many people have tuned out. But, if you remember your Aesop, the real danger of crying wolf is that sometimes the wolf actually shows up. Here's hoping that the Indiana legislature holds the line.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Democrats alarmed over new data showing voters fleeing to GOP
Democrats are sounding the alarm on new data showing they are losing voters to Republicans across the country. A devastating New York Times report Wednesday showed that of the 30 states that maintain voter registration records by political party, Democrats fell behind Republicans in all of them between the 2020 and 2024 elections. In total, Republicans added up to 4.5 million voters compared to Democrats, creating a huge hold that could set Democrats back for years. 'I think it should be an alarm' for the Democratic Party, said party strategist Eddie Vale. 'I think it's a real problem.' The new data comes as Democrats struggle to figure out how to get out of the political wilderness after losing the presidency to Donald Trump and control of both chambers of Congress to the GOP. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has found traction with attacks on Trump, mimicking the president on social media and energizing many in his party. But the Democratic brand itself has taken a number of big hits, and The New York Times data is just the latest point suggesting the party has lost its way. Vale noted that a span of voters, including people of different races and ages, were abandoning the party, according to the Times reporting. He said his worry is that all of these different kinds of voters feel like the Democratic Party left them. They 'all shared the broader fact that they are working class and not feeling like we were talking to them or actually going to help them, so that needs to be fixed,' he said. Another Democratic strategist found the report disheartening at a time when Democrats are feeling rudderless and leaderless and lacking a coherent message for voters. 'Two things need to happen for Trump's political movement to fail: Trump and MAGA popularity plummets and Democrats' brand popularity rises,' the strategist said. 'The former is happening but not the latter.' 'You have to have something clear to offer an alternative vision,' the strategist added. 'The voter registration lag is directly related to this because the Democratic brand is flat. It's one of the reasons why the most successful Democrats in this environment run against both parties.' Democrats have been feeling dejected since their devastating defeat in November, when they lost control of not just the presidency but the House and the Senate, which they had previously controlled. Recent polls show that Democrats view their party as weak. An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll in July revealed that about 1 in 5 Democrats described their party in a positive light. And a poll by the Democratic super PAC Unite the Country obtained by The Hill last month showed that voters perceived the Democratic Party as 'out of touch,' 'woke' and 'weak.' The struggle to connect with voters has been a running theme for months, with even Democrats acknowledging that they have yet to put forward a compelling message. A Wall Street Journal poll out late last month showed Democrats' popularity had hit the lowest point in 35 years, as 63 percent of voters had an unfavorable view of the party. At the same time, 33 percent of those surveyed held a favorable view. The drop in voter registration for Democrats 'matches what we see in the polls,' said Republican strategist Susan Del Percio, who does not support Trump. 'People are unsatisfied with what the Democrats are offering.' 'It shows how Democrats took things for granted and got out-hustled by Republicans, and I don't say that with glee or anything else,' Del Percio added. 'But the numbers are there, and this is proof in the pudding.' A major Democratic donor was more scathing: 'Our party sucks. Our leadership sucks. Our message sucks. Why would anyone want to be a Democrat?' 'We're completely out of touch,' the donor said. Democrats also say they are aware of voters' perceptions and views of the party and have sought to make inroads with key demographics that have strayed from their party. They have been conducting a series of postmortems and focus groups in an effort to win the voters back. Steve Schale, the veteran Democratic strategist, said the only voter registration that has 'really moved the needle in the last 20 years has been centered around the party and candidates' and that Democrats should return to that model. 'Not only does party-based voter registration accomplish the rote goal of registering voters, it also requires the kind of outreach in key communities that we have long rightly been criticized for abandoning,' Schale said. 'But to this, donors have to be willing to support the DNC [Democratic National Committee] and state parties.' 'It won't happen on its own,' Schale added. At the same time, Vale cautioned that the Democratic Party should not simply mend what's broken. They have to be forward-looking. 'We need to make sure that while we fix it we don't only fight the last war and not be attuned to things possibly changing again,' Vale said. 'Because we have already seen in a lot of polling that younger people, Latino and African American men are souring on Trump and that can be something that can be the leading edge of winning them back registration-wise.' In the end, Democratic strategist Anthony Coley said, the numbers amount to trust with voters and 'a larger problem with the Democratic brand.' 'Voters have run away from the party for a variety of reasons but trust — or the lack of it — tops the list,' Coley said. 'Too many voters just don't trust the Democratic Party to deliver on issues they care about.'
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
The Memo: Trump ignites new culture war battle over the Smithsonian — and slavery
President Trump has plunged once more into the nation's cultural wars — this time with Washington's famous Smithsonian Institution in his sights. As is often the case, the manner of Trump's attack risks significant blowback, even as it delights his fans. Specifically, in a social media blast about how 'OUT OF CONTROL' the Smithsonian allegedly is, Trump contended that its exhibits were excessively focused on 'how bad Slavery was.' Whether that sentiment was clumsily phrased or fully intentional, it ignited a storm because of the implication that slavery was somehow not quite as bad as commonly portrayed. California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) — a potential 2028 presidential candidate who has adopted an ever more combative social media stance against Trump in recent weeks — contended that the president was 'trying to ERASE slavery from U.S. history.' Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) blasted Trump's comment as 'outrageous and un-American' and further argued, 'If Trump thinks slavery wasn't bad, he clearly needs to spend more time in a museum.' Media commentators expressed their own criticisms. CNN 'Newsnight' anchor Abby Phillip began her show on Tuesday with a monologue in which she noted, 'It's important to say, objectively, slavery was indeed bad. It was evil — the nation's original sin. And it is impossible to understand the true history of this country without fully grappling with slavery's impact.' It would be naive to imagine that one more Trump controversy will do anything to fundamentally change his political fortunes. Trump has peppered the national discourse with inflammatory remarks since he descended the Trump Tower escalator to launch his first campaign a decade ago, accusing Mexico of sending 'rapists' across the southern border. Still, his propensity to ignite new fights, often on some of the most sensitive issues of American life, surely contributes to popularity ratings that are, overall, mediocre — despite the ferocious loyalty of his base. Even as his supporters laud the changes he has wrought in the first seven months of his second term, recent polls have shown most Americans disapproving of his job performance. A recent Ipsos/Reuters poll put Trump 14 points underwater, with 54 percent of survey respondents disapproving and 40 percent approving. An Economist/YouGov poll indicated his net rating was even worse, 16 points in the negative. Trump's ratings when it comes to personal attributes also reflect broad distaste for his approach. A second Economist poll earlier this month asked Americans if they liked Trump as a person, regardless of whether or not they agree with his policies. Just 33 percent of respondents said they liked him. Forty-eight percent said they disliked him — including almost 1 in 5 self-described conservatives. That being said, there is obviously a political market for what Trump is selling, especially among culturally conservative Americans who feel alienated by society's liberal shifts in recent decades. He notably placed his attack on the Smithsonian within the framework of the institution allegedly being excessively 'woke'— and insufficiently patriotic. Despite the nebulousness over what 'wokeness' actually is, Trump has used similar charges against leading universities. Those attacks have drawn much media comment, but it's unclear they have sparked commensurate public outrage. A number of elite institutions have sought some form of accommodation with him. In Trump's case, it's also often hard to distinguish between 'culture war' rhetoric and substantive policy. The former seems to drive the latter in his case, to an unusual extent. There are subjects on which this plays to his political advantage — the most obvious being immigration, where he has spoken frequently about an 'invasion' that can only be repelled by his hawkish policies. During last year's election campaign, immigration was consistently Trump's strongest issue — a finding that suggests his language on the issue resonates widely, even as it appalls critics. He has, more recently, used similarly emotive language as he seeks to justify his deployment of the National Guard and other federal law enforcement agencies in Washington, D.C., as well as his takeover of the city's police department. In that instance, Trump has contended that 'the Democrat Government of D.C. has largely stopped investigating, arresting, and prosecuting most crime,' and has spoken of a crime emergency, despite declining violent crime rates. He has also promised that his law enforcement takeover will result in the District of Columbia being 'LIBERATED' from 'Crime, Savagery, Filth and Scum.' In this case, however, his words have rung hollow for the vast majority of residents of the District. A Washington Post-Schar School poll of D.C. residents published on Wednesday found 79 percent of those surveyed oppose his federal takeover of the police and his deployment of the guard and FBI. It is, of course, arguable whether Trump's language and actions in relation to Washington are really aimed at meeting the needs of the strongly Democratic city — or about playing to his base in the heartlands by casting the capital in a negative and quasi-subversive light. In the end, there is no plausible possibility that Trump will back off the culture war fights that he has embraced for so long. He can argue that approach has brought him this far — even as it has also fueled the intensity of the opposition to him.
