Some Hopkins students, recent grads have visas revoked by federal government
About a dozen Johns Hopkins University graduate students and recent graduates had their visa records terminated by the federal government, the university announced Tuesday.
In response, the Baltimore university is providing support to those students through the Office of International Services, such as academic advising and health and wellbeing services, according to the school's website.
'We have received no information about the specific basis for the revocations but we have no indication that they are associated with free expression activities on campus,' the statement reads. 'While visa revocations require students to depart the United States, we are not aware of any arrests or detentions of Johns Hopkins students as a result of these visa actions.'
The F-1 visa are being terminated through the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The program is a part of the National Security Investigations Division and helps 'government organizations that have an interest in information on nonimmigrants whose primary reason for coming to the United States is to be students,' according to the division's website.
Hopkins is one of a dozen colleges reporting instances of international student records being terminated in the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System, according to the Presidents' Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, which provides information on how immigration policies and practices impact students.
On Monday, the University of Wisconsin–Madison announced the terminations of six current students and seven alumni on employment extensions, which means they must depart the United States immediately.
The school said in a statement that it wasn't aware of federal law enforcement activity and doesn't believe the actions are related to free speech events or political activity either.
'However, the precise rationale for these terminations is unclear,' UW-Madison said.
On Friday, Stanford University announced four students and two recent graduates had their student visas revoked.
The University of Pennsylvania, Duke University, Tufts University and Columbia University are also among the other schools the federal government reportedly terminated the visas of students and/or alumni.
Hopkins has a longstanding policy of not providing information about its affiliates' immigration statuses unless required by law and not allowing access to college facilities unless mandated by a court order, according to the university.
'Our most important guidance is to contact Johns Hopkins Public Safety if you should encounter immigration enforcement officers on campus,' the university's statement says. 'Public Safety will immediately coordinate with the Office of General Counsel, and is best positioned to handle the situation for the safety and wellbeing of all involved.'
This article will be updated.
Have a news tip? Contact Todd Karpovich at tkarpovich@baltsun.com or on X as @ToddKarpovich.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: Trump's looming cuts to high-speed rail project represent a ‘backward vision'
To the editor: The Pentagon is projected to spend a staggering $2.1 trillion on the F-35 fighter jet program. This weapons system has been plagued by cost overruns, technical failures and delays. Many military analysts now consider the F-35 already obsolete, a Cold War relic in a world facing very different threats. Yet, the Trump administration has raised no concerns. In fact, it's proposed increasing the Pentagon's budget by $150 billion this year, funneling even more money into machines of war. Now contrast that with California's high-speed rail project: a first-of-its-kind system in the U.S. that's projected to create tens of thousands of jobs, stimulate billions in economic activity and drastically reduce carbon emissions. Instead of supporting this vision of a cleaner, more connected America, the Trump administration has actively undermined it ('Trump administration sees 'no viable path' forward to finish high-speed rail project, moves to pull federal funding,' June 4). It's a backward vision: We pour trillions into fighter jets designed to kill, while blocking a transportation system designed to move people, strengthen our economy and protect our planet. Imagine if we invested that $2.1 trillion into a nationwide high-speed rail network, connecting major cities, revitalizing regional economies and leading the world in sustainable infrastructure. It's time to rethink our priorities. The California high-speed rail project deserves more support, not less. Donald Flaherty, Burbank .. To the editor: The fight over high-speed rail is ridiculous. I just returned from three weeks in Japan, a place where bullet trains run the length and breadth of the country and ordinary trains that connect with them go to places the bullet trains don't. When someone wants to go from Tokyo to Kyoto, they don't think about flying or driving, they hop on a train. Compared to Japan, it's as if we're in the Stone Age when it comes to transportation. Plus, these trains run clean on electricity and don't spew harmful exhaust fumes. Murray Zichlinsky, Long Beach
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: What we know about 'Big Beautiful Bill' banning states from regulating AI for 10 years
Claim: H.R. 1, commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, contains a provision that bans states from regulating artificial intelligence for 10 years. Rating: Context: If the "Big Beautiful Bill" becomes law, states and local governments would be unable to enforce any regulations on AI systems and models involved in interstate commerce for 10 years. There are exceptions for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems. A budget bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed on May 22, 2025, allegedly bans all 50 states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade, according to claims shared on social media in early June. As the Senate prepared to take up H.R. 1, more commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, people online expressed their concerns about the alleged AI-related provisions in the legislation. For example, one X user shared this claim (archived) on June 2, 2025: Similar claims also appeared in Facebook (archived) posts (archived) around the same time. Snopes reviewed the text of H.R. 1 and found a provision that bans states from regulating AI systems "entered into interstate commerce" for 10 years in Section 43201 of the bill. Paragraph (c) in that section outlines the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation: (1) In general. – Except as provided in paragraph (2), no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce, during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, any law or regulation of that State or a political subdivision thereof limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce. In other words, if the bill becomes law, states and local governments will be blocked from enforcing any regulations on AI systems and models that are involved in interstate commerce for 10 years. The phrase "interstate commerce" broadly refers to business or activity that crosses state lines. But in the context of this bill, the distinction likely doesn't mean much. As a result, we've rated the claim mostly true. The Supreme Court has said activities that happen entirely within one state can still count as interstate commerce if they have a significant enough impact on the national economy, as David Brody, a civil rights and technology legal expert, explained in an article for Tech Policy Press published on May 27, 2025. That means many AI systems would likely be subject to the federal rules if H.R. 1 passes. However, there are some exceptions to the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation — notably for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems, according to the bill text. Snopes reached out to the White House and the office of U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, who introduced H.R. 1, for comment about the 10-year moratorium on states regulating AI and the purpose of including it in the bill, and is awaiting responses. Multiple Republican lawmakers have voiced support for the 10-year moratorium, with some saying a patchwork of state laws doesn't support innovation and others stressing the importance of a federal approach to AI regulation. But other federal and state lawmakers as well as watchdog groups have strongly opposed the proposed rule over concerns about limiting states' ability to deal with potential harms caused by AI. For example, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said in an X post on June 3, 2025, that she "did not know about" the section of H.R. 1 that bans states from regulating AI for a decade, adding that she is "adamantly opposed" to the provision. Hundreds of state lawmakers across the political spectrum also signed a letter addressed to the U.S. House and Senate on June 3, 2025, expressing "strong opposition" to the 10-year moratorium on AI regulation. The letter read in part, "The proposed 10-year freeze of state and local regulation of AI and automated decision systems would cut short democratic discussion of AI policy in the states with a sweeping moratorium that threatens to halt a broad array of laws and restrict policymakers from responding to emerging issues." Nearly two weeks earlier, a coalition of advocacy organizations, including Common Sense Media, Fairplay and Encode, also called on congressional leaders to oppose the provision, writing in part that AI companies would have "no rules, no accountability and total control" if it were to take effect. In a letter dated May 21, 2025, the groups wrote: As written, the provision is so broad it would block states from enacting any AI-related legislation, including bills addressing hyper-sexualized AI companions, social media recommendation algorithms, protections for whistleblowers, and more. It ties lawmakers' hands for a decade, sidelining policymakers and leaving families on their own as they face risks and harms that emerge with this fast-evolving technology in the years to come. Discussions about AI companions and possible issues arising from their use have gained prominence in recent months. For example, research from Drexel University in Philadelphia suggests that inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment, during conversations with AI chatbots is "becoming a widespread problem," the university said on May 5, 2025. Consumer Reports, another advocacy organization, also raised concerns about states being unable to deal with a variety of issues that AI technology poses, including sexually explicit images, audio and video created without a person's consent. Snopes has previously looked into other claims about the "Big Beautiful Bill," including whether it contains a provision allowing the U.S. president to delay or cancel elections. Arrington, Jodey. "Text - H.R.1 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): One Big Beautiful Bill Act." 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Brody, David. "The Big Beautiful Bill Could Decimate Legal Accountability for Tech and Anything Tech Touches." Tech Policy Press, 27 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Cornell Law School. "Commerce Clause." Legal Information Institute, 18 Sept. 2018, Accessed 4 June 2025. Hendrix, Justin. "Transcript: US House Subcommittee Hosts Hearing on 'AI Regulation and the Future of US Leadership.'" Tech Policy Press, 21 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025. Open letter from consumer advocacy organizations to congressional leadership. Common Sense Media, 21 May 2025, Accessed 4 June 2025.
Axios
2 hours ago
- Axios
Scoop: Rocket launchers, missiles to be featured in Army's D.C. parade
Army officials are preparing to display rocket launchers and missiles along with more than a hundred military aircraft and vehicles next weekend at the D.C. parade celebrating the Army's 250th anniversary, Axios has learned. Why it matters: President Trump has envisioned the June 14 parade — which is scheduled on his 79th birthday — as a show of U.S. military might. Zoom in: Such a display of military equipment is rare in the United States, and critics of the event have expressed concerns about that imagery as well as the damage that heavy military vehicles could pose to the city's streets. But officials are eager to showcase U.S. weaponry such as the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS), which is used to launch rockets. The launchers have been used in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria. There also will be a static display of precision-guided missiles, the officials said, and a flyover by F-22 fighter jets. About 7,000 military personnel will be involved in the parade, which will run along Constitution Avenue NW. It's projected to cost about $45 million — roughly one-third of that for post-parade street repairs. Zoom out: The parade is set to begin at 6:30 pm, and will start at 23rd Street and Constitution Avenue NW and end at 15th and Constitution Avenue NW. Trump will have a review stand on the Ellipse. What they're saying: "When the president came into office on Jan. 20, he made it clear that he wanted to ... feature the United States Army as the first branch of the United States military to be constituted of the American republic, and he wanted to give the U.S. Army a very special birthday parade," Ambassador Monica Crowley, chief of protocol of the United States, told Axios. By the numbers: The parade will include 28 M1A1 Abrams tanks, 28 M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, and four Paladin Howitzers.
