After contributions to Virginia, international students face uncertainty due to Trump's visa changes
The University of Virginia has been a critical benefactor of international students during the 2023-24 school year, according to NAFSA. (Sarah Vogelsong / Virginia Mercury)
Virginia's colleges and universities could lose millions of dollars and thousands of jobs after the federal government froze international student visa interviews on Tuesday, mounted efforts to require all foreign students to undergo social media vetting and announced plans to 'aggressively revoke' Chinese students' visas.
The actions, spearheaded by Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the behest of President Donald Trump's administration, are likely to disrupt international students considering attending any of the schools in the commonwealth. Over 21,000 international students were enrolled at Virginia colleges and universities in the 2023-2024 academic year, according to the National Association of Foreign Advisors' Association of International Educators.
International students contributed $807.2 million to Virginia's higher learning institutions in the same period, NAFSA reported in its latest data.
Tim Gibson, president of the Virginia Conference of the American Association of University Professors, said the student visa interview pause and other changes could negatively impact international students, who have proven to make positive contributions to U.S. universities and the commonwealth, and deter international students from pursuing an education in America, including Virginia.
'They just want to learn and they come here because they want to learn from us,' Gibson said, 'and they want to learn at American universities because American universities have a stellar reputation around the world for academic freedom, for having resources to support excellent undergraduate and graduate instruction, and for having the kind of freedom of an openness to explore the questions you want to explore and to make the contributions you want to make.'
George Mason University, located in Fairfax County in Northern Virginia, was the highest recipient of funding from international students, receiving $207.5 million, ahead of Virginia Tech, the University of Virginia, VCU, and Northern Virginia Community College, which rounded out the top five institutions in the commonwealth with the most financial benefit from foreign students during the 2023-24 school year.
Student visas are essential for international students to legally enter, reside, and study in the United States, including at institutions in Virginia, which, if foreign students stop attending, could face financial challenges since students from outside the U.S. pay higher tuition fees compared to in-state students.
Since Tuesday, the administration has directed U.S. embassies and consulates, who are responsible for issuing visas, to suspend new visa interviews for international students seeking to study in the U.S. until further guidance is provided.
The move comes after the administration accused some institutions, including Harvard University, of allowing antisemitism on campus. The administration is attempting to revoke Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, which enables the university to enroll international students. A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's attempt to do so, after Harvard filed a lawsuit to retain the right to admit international students.
On Wednesday, Rubio announced the State Department along with the Department of Homeland Security will be revoking visas for Chinese students, including those with 'connections' to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in 'critical fields.' The agencies will be revising visa criteria to enhance scrutiny of all future visa applications from the People's Republic of China and Hong Kong, Rubio's statement read.
Gibson said the announcement is concerning for many students, especially graduate students, because they often bring their families who attend daycares and schools in the commonwealth.
'Now they're threatened with deportation for no reason other than paranoia, racism, and xenophobia,' Gibson said. 'Even just making a threat has irreparably harmed the international reputation of our universities and colleges.'
In a statement on Tuesday, NAFSA said the latest action by the Trump administration is another 'misguided' and 'deeply troubling attack' against international students, who are facing arrests, visa revocations and threats to their ability to enroll in certain U.S. institutions.
The association said it's also a waste of taxpayer funding to screen students who are already subject to extensive background checks, compared to business visitors and tourists.
'If the administration believes enhanced scrutiny is necessary, it should be applied uniformly — not selectively to students who have long contributed to American classrooms, communities, and cutting-edge research,' a NAFSA representative said. 'Moreover, there is no urgent justification to halt visa appointments while internal policy updates are considered. This only adds unnecessary delays, fuels uncertainty, and damages our reputation as a welcoming destination for global talent.'
This week's actions aren't the first issues concerning international students the Trump administration has weighed in on.
In January, the administration directed U.S. diplomats and consulates to refer certain student and exchange visitor visa applicants to its fraud prevention unit for mandatory social media checks, through two executive orders focused on protecting the country from foreign threats and combating antisemitism.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Oil finishes down on possible OPEC+ output hike
By Erwin Seba HOUSTON (Reuters) -U.S. crude futures fell on Friday as traders expected OPEC+ would decide on Saturday to boost oil output for July beyond previous forecasts. Brent crude futures settled down 25 cents, or 0.39%, at $63.90 a barrel. U.S. West Texas Intermediate crude finished down 15 cents, or 0.25%, at $60.79 a barrel, having earlier dropped more than $1 a barrel. The Brent July futures contract is due to expire on Friday. The more liquid August contract was down 71 cents, or 1.12%, at $62.64 a barrel. At these levels, the front-month benchmark contracts were headed for weekly losses over 1%. Prices dipped into negative territory after Reuters reported that OPEC+ may discuss an increase in July output larger than the 411,000 barrels per day (bpd) rise that the group decided on for May and June. "What OPEC+ is planning doesn't look particularly supportive for the oil market," said Matt Smith, Kpler's lead analyst for the Americas. The potential OPEC+ output hike comes as the global surplus has widened to 2.2 million bpd, likely necessitating a price adjustment to prompt a supply-side response and restore balance, said JPMorgan analysts in a note, adding that they expected prices to remain within the current range before easing into the high $50s by year-end. Phil Flynn, a senior analyst with Price Futures Group, said an online post on Truth Social by U.S. President Donald Trump that seemed to threaten more changes in tariff levels for Chinese imports also put pressure on crude prices. "Trump's Truth Social message on China failing to observe a truce on tariffs also combined with the Reuters headline to push prices down," Flynn said. Trump's tariffs were expected to remain in effect after a federal appeals court temporarily reinstated them on Thursday, reversing a trade court's decision a day earlier to put an immediate block on the sweeping duties. U.S. energy firms this week cut the number of oil and natural gas rigs operating for a fifth week in a row to the lowest since November 2021, energy services firm Baker Hughes said in its closely followed report on Friday. It was the first time since September 2023 that the number of rigs declined for five straight weeks. Baker Hughes said this week's decline put the total count down by 37 rigs, or 6%, from this time last year. Oil rigs fell by four to 461 this week, their lowest since November 2021, the company said. Gas rigs rose by one to 99.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Biden diagnosed with aggressive prostate cancer
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Former President Joe Biden was diagnosed with an "aggressive" form of prostate cancer that has spread to his bones, his office said Sunday. Biden, 82, received the diagnosis on Friday and he and his family are "reviewing treatment options." Biden's office said his cancer was given a Gleason score of 9, with 10 being the most malignant. "While this represents a more aggressive form of the disease, the cancer appears to be hormone-sensitive which allows for effective management," the statement said. Once it has metastasized to the bones, "it's very treatable, but not curable," Dr. Matthew Smith of Massachusetts General Brigham Cancer Center told The Associated Press. Cancer and tragedy have been a "recurring part of Biden's personal and political life," The Washington Post said. He "dedicated much of his later career to cancer research after losing his son Beau to brain cancer in 2015." When launching his 2022 "cancer moonshot" to halve the U.S. cancer death rate over 25 years, Biden said it could be an "American moment to prove to ourselves and, quite frankly, the world that we can do really big things." Thanks to prostate cancer treatments developed in the past few years, "life is measured in years now, not months," University of Washington specialist Dr. Daniel Lin told The New York Times. People with metastatic prostate cancer "can live 5, 7, 10 or more years," said Dr. Judd Moul at Duke University. So an octagenarian like Biden "could hopefully pass away from natural causes and not from prostate cancer."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Starmer's enslavement to woke ideology is a gift to the new axis of evil
When wokeness in Britain went from being a loony Left preoccupation to a way of life, hot on the heels of America's wokeward tack in 2020, only fools, villains and villainous fools insisted that nothing much was happening – apart from a bit of long overdue fairness. Of course, they said, the old Right-wing cis white straight men and women were squealing about the embrace by the virtuous of 'social justice' and 'equity,' but that didn't mean there was a real culture war afoot. It was obvious to me from the start of the woke era, however, that this was not 'just' a culture war but a real one, in a truly modern sense, with real consequences that would be felt far beyond a few workplaces or university seminar rooms. The vaulting from the seminar room into the world of the ideology linking 'white privilege' to empire to colonialism to the immovable fact of white British guilt has led to poisonous politics on the Left, a troubling reaction on the populist Right, and a ruling class who make decisions with our money, our personal safety and the security of the country based on it. If people have been injured or died already thanks to wokeness – for instance in the failure to confidently and properly police Islamist terror suspects or BAME (Black, Asian and minority ethnic knife crime), or in the body-destroying treatments handed out by LGBTQ+ allies to kids who said they were trans in the gender movement that followed Black Lives Matter – then much more is set to come. One of the most flagrant case studies in how the woke mindset can be physically dangerous is Starmer's Chagos islands agreement. The 'deal' is to hand the British territory to Mauritius, and lease back the land on the island of Diego Garcia, on which sits a strategically vital, Anglo-American military base. The lease costs £30 billion, and will be paid over 99 years. The Government's strange argument for the deal was that it would prevent the security risks that could come from instability due to international lawfare on this last 'colonial' outpost of Britain's. Starmer, somehow, did not think that it was more of a security concern that Chinese influence in Mauritius is malign and growing: China has now announced that Mauritius will be joining its power-grabbing Belt and Road initiative. Indeed, Starmer's comments about the handover in a press conference were very odd. He said with confidence that only Britain's enemies were against it. 'In favour are all of our allies: the US, Nato, Five Eyes, India. Against it: Russia, China, Iran.' Yet days after it went through, China was celebrating. Beijing's ambassador to Mauritius, Huang Shifang, told guests at the Chinese embassy in Mauritius's capital of Port Louis that China sent 'massive congratulations' to Mauritius on the deal, and that China 'fully supports' Mauritius's attempt to 'safeguard national sovereignty'. It's hard to think of a more cynical, almost joyously so, use of this terminology. China, after all, is a country obsessed with taking by force the democratic, independent Taiwan (Mauritius, China has made clear, supports its doctrine that Taiwan is already part of China); repressing free speech in Hong Kong, where it operates a subtle reign of terror, and subjecting its Uyghur Muslim population in Xinjiang to sadistic treatment in internment camps. And now it gets to set about enjoying all manner of devious proximity to our all-important Eastern base. So yes, Britain's Chagos deal makes delicious sense to China, but makes no sense for us. Unless, of course, you are Starmer and his inner circle, and you're enslaved to the twin ideologies of post-colonialism and 'international law' – which lands you in the awkward and unfortunate position, as we have seen, of ending up in agreement with China on core values like self-determination. It's a mess. All this Chinese gloating disguised as proper appreciation for nations' rights to freedom from colonial shackles serves as a useful reminder of just how suspicious such language has become. Yes, it is mass-peddled by august 'international' bodies, NGOs, courts and the UN. But these have all been corrupted by those with sinister anti-Western agendas. Indeed, the intranational bodies charged with pursuing a kinder world order with 'human rights' pursued through law always seem to favour those who care least about those obligations. It was telling when Lord Hermer, Starmer's attorney general, compared those in favour of withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to the Nazi philosopher and jurist Carl Schmitt, when what membership of the ECHR really means, in practice, is having to treat terrorists and foreign mass murderers with the utmost consideration. The greatest, longest-running example of the hijacking of a world organisation is the UN, which has been faking outrage at violations of 'international law' to endanger and ostracise Israel for decades. As Natasha Hausdorff, the international lawyer known for pointing out the legal flaws in the numerous evil smears levelled at Israel, notes : 'Armies of NGOs [have fed] the United Nations system and international bodies like the ICC and ICJ' so that 'pseudo-legal language permeates public discourse about Israel. This has now broken into public consciousness, but it has been building in the NGO world and UN world for a long time.' The once honourable ICJ – the International Court of Justice – was seized by South Africa to bring a case against Benjamin Netanyahu as a war criminal even as Israel sacrificed soldiers fighting Hamas in Gaza, resulting in an arrest warrant for the Israeli PM which Britain refuses to reject. As the famous American lawyer and Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz says of the ICJ: 'It's not international, it's not a court and it doesn't do justice.' The bloc that still determines the balance of power and the fate of countries – just – is the Western one. And we are now in great peril, due to being gullible and ill-informed, anti-Semitic, terror-appeasing and morally confused. Our cultures swallowed whole by Leftist cultural theories that were meant to never leave academia – those of post-structuralism and post-colonialism – and under their influence we turn our faces towards the lies pouring from the Eastern axis of 'resistance' – with lethal consequences. The international human rights community in all its respectable clout gives this evil nonsense the stamp of approval. Older people just about remember when international law meant something. Some saw first-hand the real genocide of the mid-20th century, others spectacular bloodshed under monsters and in the course of war. Some of us just remember hearing about those times and events, from parents and grandparents. To us, the souring of organisations like the ECHR, ICC, ICJ, UN – the whole concept of 'international law' itself – is bitter and clear. The rising generation, though, those who have taken up en masse the garbage of third-rate academic theories about coloniser and oppressor, who misuse terms including racism, apartheid, genocide, settler-colonialism, fascism and even capitalism, seem to genuinely think these corrupted organisations are the end of the moral and geopolitical rainbow. That reference to their motions and cases and objections and votes must end all arguments; that the old animating force behind international courts for human rights and justice was just a relic of a racist age, and now we know better. In some ways we do. But those who still chase after 'international' legitimacy are barking up the wrong tree – either accidentally or, like China, on purpose. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
