Harvard and University of Toronto make contingency plan for international students
TORONTO, June 26 (Reuters) - Harvard University and the University of Toronto have unveiled a contingency plan that would allow select Harvard graduate students to continue their studies in Canada if U.S. visa restrictions prevent them from re-entering the United States.
It is the first international student backup strategy announced since the U.S. Department of Homeland Security moved last month to strip Harvard of its ability to enroll international students. A federal judge has since blocked the government's move.
In response to potential U.S. visa challenges, students at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government who are unable to return to the United States will have the option to continue their studies through a visiting student program at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy.
The program would combine courses taught by Kennedy and Munk faculty, the deans of both institutions said in a statement sent to Reuters this week.
The contingency plans are being announced to ease student uncertainty, but will only be implemented if there is enough demand from those unable to enter the U.S. due to visa or entry restrictions, the statement said.
'With these contingency plans in place, HKS will be able to continue to provide a world-class public policy education to all of our students, even if they cannot make it to our campus this year," Harvard Kennedy School Dean Jeremy Weinstein said.
The program will be available to international students who have already completed one year at the U.S. campus.
U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has threatened or moved to cut billions of dollars in federal research funding for Harvard. The administration has accused the university of failing to adequately address antisemitism and campus violence, violating reporting requirements, and coordinating with foreign entities, including China's Communist Party, in ways that raise national security concerns.
Over the past five years, 52% of Kennedy students have come from outside the United States, the school's media office said.
The school enrolls 739 students from 92 countries in programs aimed at developing leadership in public policy and government, according to the Harvard International Office website.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
15 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court poised to rule in challenge to Texas age-check for online porn
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Friday in a challenge on free speech grounds to a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify the age of users in a case testing the legality of state efforts to keep minors from viewing such material online. A trade group representing adult entertainment performers and companies appealed a lower court's decision allowing the Republican-led state's age-verification mandate, finding that it likely did not violate the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment safeguard against government abridgment of speech. The Texas measure is one of 24 similar ones enacted around the United States, primarily in Republican-governed states, with some set to take effect in the months ahead, according to the Free Speech Coalition, which challenged the law. The law requires websites whose content is more than a third "sexual material harmful to minors" to have all users submit personally identifying information verifying they are at least age 18 to gain access. The case tested the limits of state powers to protect minors from explicit materials deemed by policymakers to be harmful to them with measures that burden the access of adults to constitutionally protected expression. Supreme Court precedents have protected access by adults to non-obscene sexual content on First Amendment grounds, including a 2004 ruling that blocked a federal law similar to the Texas measure. If the 2004 precedent prevents Texas from enforcing its law, then it should be overruled, the state argued, noting how the digital landscape has changed dramatically in the two decades since. The coalition, a trade association of adult content performers, producers and distributors, as well as companies that run pornographic websites including and argued that online age verification unlawfully stifles the free speech rights of adults and exposes them to increasing risks of identity theft, extortion and data breaches. Some sites like Pornhub blocked access entirely in states with age-verification laws. Steps such as content-filtering software or on-device age verification would better protect minors while respecting the rights of adults, according to the challengers. During Jan. 15 arguments, opens new tab in the case, the justices voiced worries about the pervasiveness of pornography online and the ease with which minors are able to access it. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the mother of school-age children, noted that minors can get online porn through cellphones, tablets, gaming systems and computers, and noted that there has been an "explosion of addiction to online porn." But some of the justices also expressed concern over the burdens imposed on adults to view constitutionally protected material, debating whether the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should have applied a stricter form of judicial review to the Texas law than the one it actually used that gave deference to legislators. U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra issued a preliminary injunction in 2023, blocking the law. The 5th Circuit ruled in 2024 that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed in their First Amendment challenge to the age-verification requirement, lifting Ezra's injunction on that provision. The 5th Circuit upheld Ezra's injunction against another provision requiring websites to display "health warnings" about viewing pornography. The Supreme Court last year declined to halt enforcement of the law while the case proceeded.
Reuters
15 minutes ago
- Reuters
Mamdani's NYC primary win sparks surge in anti-Muslim posts, advocates say
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - Anti-Muslim online posts targeting New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani have surged since his Democratic primary upset this week, including death threats and comments comparing his candidacy to the September 11, 2001 attacks, advocates said on Friday. There were at least 127 violent hate-related reports mentioning Mamdani or his campaign in the day after polls closed, said CAIR Action, an arm of the Council on American Islamic Relations advocacy group, which logs such incidents. That marks a five-fold increase over a daily average of such reports tracked earlier this month, CAIR Action said in a statement. Overall, it noted about 6,200 online posts that mentioned some form of Islamophobic slur or hostility in that day long time-frame. Mamdani, a self-described democratic socialist and a 33-year-old state lawmaker, declared victory in Tuesday's primary after former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo conceded defeat. Born in Uganda to Indian parents, Mamdani would be the city's first Muslim and Indian American mayor if he wins the November general election. "We call on public officials of every party - including those whose allies are amplifying these smears - to unequivocally condemn Islamophobia," said Basim Elkarra, executive director of CAIR Action. The advocacy group said its hate monitoring system includes its own scraping and analysis of posts, online submissions by the public and notifications from law enforcement. About 62% of the anti-Muslim posts against Mamdani originated on X, CAIR Action said. People close to Republican President Donald Trump, including one of his sons, are among those spreading anti-Muslim rhetoric, advocates said. Donald Trump Jr, the president's son, wrote on X on Wednesday that "New York City has fallen" while sharing a post that said New Yorkers had "voted for" 9/11. Also on Wednesday, Republican U.S. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene posted an AI-generated picture of the Statue of Liberty draped in a burqa. President Trump has pursued domestic policies that rights advocates have described as anti-Muslim, including banning travel from some predominantly Muslim or Arab countries in his first term and attempting to deport pro-Palestinian students in his current term. The White House, which did not respond to a request for comment, has denied claims of discrimination against Muslims. Trump and his allies have said they oppose Mamdani and others due to what they call the Democrats' "radical left" ideology. The New York City Police Department said earlier this month its hate crime unit was probing anti-Muslim threats against Mamdani. Manjusha Kulkarni, co-founder of Stop AAPI Hate, which documents hate against Asian Americans, and CAIR said attacks against Mamdani mirrored those endured by other South Asian and Muslim political figures, including former Vice President Kamala Harris and Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. Republicans have called Mamdani antisemitic, citing his pro-Palestinian advocacy and his criticism of Israel's military assault on Gaza after an attack by Hamas militants in October 2023. Mamdani has condemned antisemitism and has the backing of New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who is Jewish. Lander also ran in the Democratic primary. Rights advocates have noted rising antisemitism and Islamophobia since the start of the Israel-Gaza war, with fatal U.S. incidents including the shooting of two Israeli embassy staff in Washington and the stabbing of a Muslim child in Illinois. Mamdani and other Pro-Palestinian advocates, including some Jewish groups, said their criticism of Israel is wrongly conflated with antisemitism.
Reuters
32 minutes ago
- Reuters
Louisiana electoral map case due for US Supreme Court decision
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court is due to rule on Friday in a bid by Louisiana officials and civil rights groups to preserve an electoral map that raised the number of Black-majority congressional districts in the state and prompted a challenge by non-Black voters. State officials and advocacy groups have appealed a lower court's ruling that found the map laying out Louisiana's six U.S. House of Representatives districts - with two Black-majority districts, up from one previously - violated the U.S. Constitution's promise of equal protection. Black people comprise nearly a third of Louisiana's population. The case involved tensions between protecting the voting rights of minorities and adhering to the principle of equal protection, which limits the use of race in redistricting. During March 24 arguments in the case, lawyers for Louisiana argued that the map was not drawn impermissibly by the Republican-controlled state legislature with race as the primary motivation, as the lower court found last year. The map's design, the Republican-governed state argued, also sought to protect Republican incumbents including House Speaker Mike Johnson and No. 2 House Republican Steve Scalise, who both represent congressional districts in the state. Black voters tend to support Democratic candidates. "In an election year we faced the prospect of a federal court-drawn map that placed in jeopardy the speaker of the House, the House majority leader and our representative on the Appropriations Committee," Benjamin Aguinaga, solicitor general of Louisiana, told the justices during the arguments. "And so in light of those facts, we made the politically rational decision. We drew our own map to protect them." Arguments in the case centered on Louisiana's response to U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick's 2022 finding that an earlier map likely violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965, a landmark law barring racial discrimination in voting, and whether the state relied too heavily on race in devising a remedial map adding a second Black-majority district. Boundaries of legislative districts across the country are redrawn to reflect population changes every decade. In June 2022, Dick ruled that a map adopted earlier that year by the legislature containing only one Black-majority congressional district had unlawfully harmed Black voters. Dick concluded that the map likely violated the Voting Rights Act and ordered the addition of a second Black-majority district. The Supreme Court in 2023 left Dick's ruling in place, and it previously allowed the map to be used in the 2024 election. Louisiana's legislature in January 2024 approved a new map featuring two Black-majority districts. Later that month, a group of 12 Louisiana voters identifying themselves in court papers as "non-African American" sued to block the redrawn map. A lawyer for the plaintiffs did not respond to requests to provide the racial breakdown of the plaintiffs. A three-judge panel in a 2-1 ruling in April 2024 blocked the map, finding that the legislature relied too heavily on race in the map's design in violation of the Constitution's equal protection provision. The Constitution's 14th Amendment contains the equal protection language. Ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the American Civil War, the amendment addressed issues relating to the rights of formerly enslaved Black people.
