Harvard challenges Trump move to bar visas for international students
"The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing on June 5.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied.
"Harvard's behavior has jeopardized the integrity of the entire U.S. student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement.
Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the United States to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university.
The suspension will initially be for six months but can be extended. Trump's proclamation also directs the State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria.
In the court filing on June 5, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security.
"The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because noncitizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States -- just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said.
The Trump administration has launched a multifront attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges.
Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum, and the ideology of its faculty and students.
Trump's directive came a week after a federal judge in Boston, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs, announced she would issue a broad injunction blocking the administration from revoking Harvard's ability to enroll international students, who make up about a quarter of its student body.
Harvard said in Thursday's court filing that the proclamation was "a patent effort to do an end-run around this Court's order."
The university sued after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced on May 22 that her department was immediately revoking Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, which allows it to enroll foreign students.
Noem's action was temporarily blocked almost immediately by Burroughs. On the eve of a hearing before her last week, the department changed course and said it would instead challenge Harvard's certification through a lengthier administrative process.
Trump vs. Harvard: Trump bans Harvard from admitting new international students
Nonetheless, Burroughs said she planned to issue a longer-term preliminary injunction at Harvard's urging, saying one was necessary to give some protection to Harvard's international students.
Wednesday's two-page directive from Trump said Harvard had "demonstrated a history of concerning foreign ties and radicalism," and had "extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries," including China. The directive also said Harvard had seen a "drastic rise in crime in recent years while failing to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus," and had failed to provide sufficient information to the Homeland Security Department about foreign students' "known illegal or dangerous activities."
The school in Thursday's court filing said those claims were unsubstantiated.
(Reporting by Nate Raymond, Steve Gorman, Daniel Wiessner and Costas Pitas; Editing by Caitlin Webber, Stephen Coates and Alexia Garamfalvi)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
US Supreme Court asked to pause order reinstating Education Department staff
The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court on Friday said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the lay-offs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Mr Joun's order has blocked one of Mr Trump's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the lay-offs 'will likely cripple the department'. But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Mr Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The lay-offs help put in place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states', Mr Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Mr Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Mr Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that the lay-offs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Mr Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Mr Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law'. Mr Trump later said the department's functions will be parcelled to other agencies, suggesting federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programmes involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states'. Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a 4.5 billion dollar cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.
South Wales Argus
16 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
US Supreme Court asked to pause order reinstating Education Department staff
The Justice Department's emergency appeal to the high court on Friday said US District Judge Myong Joun in Boston exceeded his authority last month when he issued a preliminary injunction reversing the lay-offs of nearly 1,400 people and putting the broader plan on hold. Mr Joun's order has blocked one of Mr Trump's biggest campaign promises and effectively stalled the effort to wind down the department. A federal appeals court refused to put the order on hold while the administration appealed. The judge wrote that the lay-offs 'will likely cripple the department'. But Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote on Friday that Mr Joun was substituting his policy preferences for those of the Trump administration. The lay-offs help put in place the 'policy of streamlining the department and eliminating discretionary functions that, in the administration's view, are better left to the states', Mr Sauer wrote. He also pointed out that the Supreme Court in April voted 5-4 to block Mr Joun's earlier order seeking to keep in place Education Department teacher-training grants. The current case involves two consolidated lawsuits that said Mr Trump's plan amounted to an illegal closure of the Education Department. One suit was filed by the Somerville and Easthampton school districts in Massachusetts along with the American Federation of Teachers and other education groups. The other suit was filed by a coalition of 21 Democratic attorneys general. The suits argued that the lay-offs left the department unable to carry out responsibilities required by Congress, including duties to support special education, distribute financial aid and enforce civil rights laws. Mr Trump has made it a priority to shut down the Education Department, though he has acknowledged that only Congress has the authority to do that. In the meantime, Mr Trump issued a March order directing Education Secretary Linda McMahon to wind it down 'to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law'. Mr Trump later said the department's functions will be parcelled to other agencies, suggesting federal student loans should be managed by the Small Business Administration and programmes involving students with disabilities would be absorbed by the Department of Health and Human Services. Those changes have not yet happened. The president argues that the Education Department has been overtaken by liberals and has failed to spur improvements to the nation's lagging academic scores. He has promised to 'return education to the states'. Opponents note that K-12 education is already mostly overseen by states and cities. Democrats have blasted the Trump administration's Education Department budget, which seeks a 15% budget cut including a 4.5 billion dollar cut in K-12 funding as part of the agency's downsizing.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
U.S., Chinese officials to meet in London next week for new round of trade talks
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.
