logo
‘It's wild': State Department, others struggle to comprehend Chinese visa plan

‘It's wild': State Department, others struggle to comprehend Chinese visa plan

Politico30-05-2025

People both inside and outside the State Department were struggling Thursday to understand how a new plan to revoke Chinese students' visas will work — and whether it will end up being a blanket ban on Chinese nationals studying in the United States.
While the administration could begin voiding visas imminently, a State Department official familiar with consular issues, granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly, said embassies had yet to receive official instructions on how to implement the plan, which also includes revising visa criteria to increase scrutiny of future applicants from China and Hong Kong.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced late Wednesday that the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security will 'aggressively revoke' visas for Chinese students with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in 'critical fields.'
But that isn't easy to put into practice, and the manner in which it is done will say a lot about the Trump administration's ultimate goals.
Reviewing all Chinese student visas could be a daunting task for the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security. There were around 277,000 Chinese students in the United States during the 2023 to 2024 school term, government data shows.
'It's wild,' said one State Department official involved in the discussions about how to implement the directives. 'It's going to be a massive headache for us.' The person, and others, were granted anonymity to discuss sensitive internal processes.
The administration may be hoping the threat alone will prompt students to reconsider attending U.S. institutions, in the same way that it has encouraged undocumented migrants to self-deport.
'That's the only reason why you would put that out there — is because you want the Chinese families who are impacted potentially by this to know,' said Carl Risch, who was assistant secretary of State for consular affairs during the first Trump administration. 'And you want to terrify them.'
Risch said it's likely the administration doesn't yet know who the policy would apply to, but that even when guidelines are established, the general public still won't know because the State Department doesn't usually advertise new vetting standards.
'You're going to implement it inside the bureau, change the guidance for adjudicating officers — often this information isn't publicly available,' said Risch, who's now a partner at the Kurzban, Kurzban, Tetzeli and Pratt law firm.
State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce declined to give details on the visa review, including how many Chinese students would be affected, the timing of the review, or the specific merits of how ties to the CCP would be assessed. 'We don't give details about what our methods are regarding visas,' she told reporters Thursday, adding 'we're not going to speculate on where this would go.'
Simply losing a student visa probably would not make a student ineligible to continue their studies on a college campus, though it could make it impossible for them to leave the U.S. without being effectively locked out.
However, if Immigration and Customs Enforcement terminates a student's record in its Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, it would likely force universities to bar them from continuing to attend and could be a step toward deportation proceedings. ICE's power to quickly terminate students' SEVIS records is the subject of intense ongoing litigation, and a federal judge in California last week issued a nationwide injunction preventing the administration from imposing 'adverse legal effect' on those whose SEVIS records have been terminated.
John Sandweg, a former head of ICE under the Obama administration, said Rubio's reference in his Wednesday statement to DHS and State working together on visa reviews indicates that the Trump administration would 'do both.'
Much of the initial vetting of Chinese students could be done via software maintained by ICE, CBP and the State Department, Sandweg said. But the CCP cases will require analysts to investigate further, he said.
Some students would leave while others, he said, might try to claim asylum or disappear in the U.S., he argued. Chinese students outside of the U.S. who are denied visas won't have much chance to protest the decision but those in the country do have the right to challenge their visa revocations in the court system, Sandweg said.
The policy could implicate tens of thousands of students and could potentially become a blanket ban on Chinese students on American campuses depending on how it is enforced.
Rick Waters, the inaugural coordinator of the State Department's China House, said he is skeptical the U.S. can 'surgically go after' parts of the Chinese student population because it would stretch the time and resources of visa-issuing consular officers.
'When we talk about the question of [determining CCP] connections, that's not something that, in my view, is workable. Even membership in the Party is not something people put on their social media,' Waters said. 'So whatever they do is going to be just changing the incentive structure for visa officers where they just reject a lot more people based on very arbitrary criteria.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Republican attorneys general accuse California of excusing 'lawlessness'
Republican attorneys general accuse California of excusing 'lawlessness'

Fox News

time11 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Republican attorneys general accuse California of excusing 'lawlessness'

FIRST ON FOX: Nearly all Republican attorneys general blasted California's Democratic leaders on Tuesday in a joint statement, accusing them of condoning criminal behavior and saying they left President Donald Trump with no choice but to activate thousands of National Guard soldiers. "In California, we're seeing the results of leadership that excuses lawlessness and undermines law enforcement," 26 attorneys general wrote in the statement, first provided to Fox News Digital. "When local and state officials won't act, the federal government must." The attorneys general said Trump's decision to federalize the National Guard to address anti-immigration enforcement riots and protests that broke out in parts of Los Angeles County over the weekend was the "right response." Their remarks stand in direct contrast to those of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democrats across the country, who widely condemned Trump's decision to send the military into California as an unnecessary escalation. Newsom sued Trump over the move and accused the president of stripping California of its sovereignty. Presidents federalizing the National Guard, which is a state-based military force that falls under the dual control of governors and presidents, is rarely carried out without the consent of a governor. Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, who led the attorneys general in issuing the statement, told Fox News Digital in a brief interview he felt Newsom was "gaslighting" the public by saying California's local and state law enforcement had the unrest under control and did not need Trump to intervene. "We all saw what was happening," Carr said. "There were federal law enforcement officers that were being attacked by mobs. And in fact, I read articles where local law enforcement were saying they were overwhelmed and they needed help. My question is, why in the world would he not accept the help of the federal government at a time where there was mob rule, where there was arson that was taking place, where assaults were occurring, instead of coddling the criminals that are doing this again?" Carr said those opposed to the Trump administration's immigration raids could "peacefully disagree with what the federal government is doing." Newsom, for his part, alleged that Trump exacerbated the riots, echoing a position some criminal justice advocates take that an immediate show of force in response to intensifying protests is an ineffective approach. In Newsom's lawsuit, attorneys wrote that Trump's decision was not only unwise but also an unlawful and "unprecedented usurpation of state authority and resources." Fox News Digital reached out to the California Attorney General's Office for comment.

Trump reverses Army base names in latest DEI purge
Trump reverses Army base names in latest DEI purge

Politico

time11 minutes ago

  • Politico

Trump reverses Army base names in latest DEI purge

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he plans to revert the names of seven major Army bases back to the Confederate generals for which they were originally named. 'We are also going to be restoring the names to Fort Pickett, Fort Hood, Fort Gordon, Fort Rucker, Fort Polk, Fort A.P. Hill and Fort Robert E. Lee,' Trump said. 'We won a lot of battles out of those forts, it's no time to change.' Trump's announcement, during a speech to soldiers at Fort Bragg, follows Biden-administration era alterations in 2023 that changed the installation names to honor new, non-Confederate individuals. Those included changing Fort Hood to Fort Cavazos, for the Army's first four-star Hispanic general. The Army previously redesignated Fort Liberty, previously known as Fort Bragg, to its original name, but honoring Private First Class Roland L. Bragg, a World War II hero instead of the Confederate general Braxton Bragg. The service also redesignated Fort Moore, after Gen. Hal Moore and his wife Julia Compton Moore, for Fred G. Benning, who won the Distinguished Service Cross during World War I. The Army is taking the same approach for the bases tapped for renaming on Tuesday, finding award-winning soldiers with the same last names as the Confederate generals to name the bases after, according to a statement released by the service after the president's speech. The president gave no timeline for the name changes and it was not immediately clear whether the Army's bases would be renamed after Confederate generals or soldiers from different eras. One army official, granted anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak, said they were caught off guard by the rapid-fire developments, which could take months to Army did not immediately respond to POLITICO's request for comment. Though the Trump administration insisted the redesignations were in-line with laws that prevent the Pentagon from naming bases after Confederate leaders or battles, Ty Seidule, a retired Army brigadier general who was the vice chair of the Congressional Naming Commission, which is tasked with relabeling bases and U.S. military assets, said that Trump's decision went against the spirit of the new rule enacted after the George Floyd protests. 'The bottom line is he's choosing surname over service,' said Seidule, who's now a visiting professor at Hamilton College. 'It is breaking the spirit of a law that was created by the will of the American people through their elected representatives.' Seidule said that the commission, which was made up of three Republicans, one Democrat and four retired flag officers, spent 20 months seeking input from the public and got 33,000 responses to change the names of Army bases and other installations and assets named after Confederates, including several U.S. Navy ships. But he said the decision still reflected that the Trump administration 'realizes that Confederates chose treason to preserve slavery, and they are unworthy of having bases named for them in America in 2025.' On Tuesday, Trump criticized Biden at several points during his speech, which was full of asides about immigration, transgender Americans and the spending bill currently being debated in Congress. His political comments in front of hundreds of soldiers from the 82nd Airborne Division led to a smattering of boos from the mostly uniformed audience when he criticized former President Joe Biden. Audience members also jeered when Trump mentioned California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whom the president clashed with over protests in California that were sparked by the Trump administration's immigration raids. Presidents normally avoid giving political speeches to military personnel. 'Do you think this crowd would have showed up for Biden,' Trump said at one point in his remarks. 'I don't think so.' 'We will liberate Los Angeles and make it free, clean and safe again,' Trump said, claiming parts of the city are under the control of international criminal gangs. The president has ordered 4,000 California National Guard soldiers and 700 Marines to Los Angeles, though so far only about 300 guardsmen have entered the city. The Marines are positioned outside Los Angeles, where they're undergoing training on crowd control, said one defense official who was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. The move to rename Army bases comes just days after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth moved to relabel a Navy vessel named after gay rights activist Harvey Milk as well as other ships named after civil rights leaders and women. Seidule, the retired Army brigadier general who served on the Biden-era naming commission, said that Trump's decision creates the risk that future administrations could take turns renaming the Army's bases. 'What happens if some other administration would name something after someone that one party thinks is just absolutely beyond the pale,' said Seidule. 'I think that this could absolutely be a tennis match.' Sam Skove contributed to this report.

Granholm: Democrats would ‘welcome' Musk ‘helping us out'
Granholm: Democrats would ‘welcome' Musk ‘helping us out'

The Hill

time12 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Granholm: Democrats would ‘welcome' Musk ‘helping us out'

Former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said Tuesday that Democrats would 'welcome' tech billionaire Elon Musk 'helping us out' after an intense clash between Musk and President Trump last week. 'I think the Democrats would welcome him helping us out, politically, but — financially, etc.,' Granholm said at Politico's 2025 Energy Summit. 'But, maybe, maybe not, I don't know. I'm not running.' Last Thursday, a fight between Musk and Trump over the president's 'big, beautiful bill' earlier in the week escalated rapidly on Musk's X platform and Trump's Truth Social platform. The president said the tech billionaire 'just went CRAZY!' and threatened Musk's government contracts. Musk alleged that Trump had ties to convicted sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein on X. The public spat followed the end of Musk's recent service in the Trump administration and an alliance with the president that appeared to start off strong. Musk endorsed Trump in July 2024 in the wake of Trump surviving an assassination attempt in Pennsylvania. Musk's administration service was marked by intense backlash from those on the left and Democrats over actions taken by Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) on the federal government. Trump's ex-personal attorney Michael Cohen on Saturday said that Trump isn't done with tech billionaire Elon Musk yet. 'They're going to really go after Elon Musk like nobody has seen, ever, in this country, because they can,' Cohen told MSNBC's Ali Velshi.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store