ICE created visa chaos for WA international students. That should worry everyone
What if someone could flip a switch to mess with your life?
That's what ICE appears to be doing to several international students and recent grads in Washington state, two of whom were in post-graduate training at UW Tacoma. One day a database said they had valid status as students in the United States, and the next day it didn't, because someone with Immigration and Customs Enforcement clicked on a button.
Worryingly, it appears in at least one case that Immigration and Customs Enforcement can't really explain what it was doing when it flipped that switch. The recent grads from UW Tacoma who saw their records changed could be in a similar predicament, though the details of their cases haven't emerged. More cases for students in the region are going forward in Tacoma on Thursday.
International scholars are guests in our region. They add to the accomplishments of our universities and put their education in our hands. They deserve competent and humane treatment from the government agency that manages their legal status in the country. This isn't that.
Even if their treatment doesn't concern you, a government agency that doesn't follow its own rules when deciding any one person's fate sets a dangerous precedent for everyone.
ICE maintains a database of international scholars in the United States with a valid student status. At a hearing in Tacoma on April 17, U.S. District Court Judge David G. Estudillo asked a lawyer representing ICE to explain the agency's decision to change the status of a Seattle-based UW doctoral student in this system.
What was the basis for ICE's action? Was the student, from China, now in the country without legal status? Would he be detained if he didn't leave immediately? Could he continue studying or not?
That a judge had to ask those questions to get the student answers was wild enough. According to his lawyer, Jay Gairson, the student learned through UW that the change could be related to the results of a criminal background check. He has a pending DUI charge from 2023.
A pending charge isn't enough for ICE to end his legal status, Gairson argued. Under U.S. immigration law, there has to be a conviction, the crime must be violent, and it must have a possible prison sentence of over one year. Gairson said not one of those things has happened – nor could they happen – based on the DUI charge. It's a nonviolent offense that's subject to a sentence of 364 days or fewer.
Even wilder were the answers ICE's lawyer, assistant U.S. Attorney Whitney Passmore, gave to the judge. Yes, she said, ICE changed the student's status within its system because of the DUI charge. In a kafkaesque twist, she said ICE was not taking a position on whether the change means he's lost his valid status as a student.
Why? Because ICE's lawyers don't know the answer to that question yet.
So as ICE's lawyers have described it, it sounds like the agency altered official records of a resident's legal status, without following its own rules, and without knowing the consequences of its own actions. That in turn sounds like something from dystopian fiction exploring themes of cruelty and incompetence.
In a temporary order, Estudillo required ICE to restore the UW doctoral student's record. He also forbade the agency from putting the student into removal proceedings based on its earlier decision to terminate the record. The judge will revisit his decision in early May after getting more information from both legal teams.
The details of the cases for the recent grads of UW Tacoma and many of the other students might be different. It might turn out that ICE discovered things about them that fall within the agency's rules for ending their legal status. Based on last week's hearing, it seems like it could take a court hearing to get that information from ICE.
For now, the switch is flipped back for one student.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNBC
16 minutes ago
- CNBC
Palantir CEO Karp says AI is dangerous and 'either we win or China will win'
Palantir CEO Alex Karp said the artificial intelligence arms race between the U.S. and China will culminate in one country coming out on top. "My general bias on AI is it is dangerous," Karp told CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" on Thursday. "There are positive and negative consequences, and either we win or China will win." Karp has been a vocal advocate for U.S AI dominance. He told CNBC in January that the country needs to "run harder, run faster" in an "all-country effort" to develop more advanced AI models. In a recent letter to shareholders, he also touted Palantir's commitment to equipping and enhancing U.S. defense interests. The billionaire tech CEO said Thursday that the U.S. currently has a leg up in the AI race and Palantir is leading the way in making companies more secure and efficient with its tools. "There is no economy in the world with this kind of corporate leadership which is willing to pivot, which understands technologies, which is willing to look at new things, but also has deep domain expertise," he said. "Our allies in the West, in Europe, are going to have to learn from us." Shares of the Denver-based data analytics and AI software firm outperformed in 2024 and have continued their ascent in 2025 as investors bet on their software and work with key government contractors and agencies. The stock is up 74% this year, but investors have to shell out on a higher earnings multiple than its tech peers. "You don't like the price, exit," Karp said on Thursday in response. Karp also asserted that the company is "not surveilling Americans" in response to recent New York Times report that Palantir is helping the Trump administration gather data on Americans.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court sides with straight woman in decision that makes it easier to file ‘reverse discrimination' suits
The Supreme Court on Thursday sided with a straight woman in Ohio who filed a 'reverse discrimination' lawsuit against her employer when her gay boss declined to promote her. The ruling will make it easier to file such suits in some parts of the country. Despite the politically divisive debate playing out over workplace diversity efforts – a fight that has been fueled by President Donald Trump – a unanimous coalition of conservative and liberal justices were in the majority. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote the opinion for the court. 'Our case law thus makes clear that the standard for proving disparate treatment under Title VII does not vary based on whether or not the plaintiff is a member of a majority group,' Jackson wrote. Marlean Ames started working for Ohio's state government in 2004 and steadily rose through the ranks at the Department of Youth Services. She claims that in 2017, she started reporting to a gay boss and was passed over for a promotion that was offered to another gay woman. Ames is challenging a requirement applied in five appeals courts across the nation that 'majority' Americans raising discrimination claims must demonstrate 'background circumstances' in order to pursue their suit. A plaintiff might meet that requirement, for instance, by providing statistical evidence documenting a pattern of discrimination against members of a majority. Ames couldn't do that and so she lost in the lower courts. An employee who is a member of a minority group does not face that same initial hurdle. The requirement was rooted in the notion that it is unusual for an employer to discriminate against a member of a majority group. But neither federal anti-discrimination law nor Supreme Court precedent speak to creating one set of requirements for a majority employee to file a discrimination suit and a different set for a minority employee. During oral arguments in the case in late February, it was clear Ames had widespread support from the justices. Citing the 'background circumstances' requirement, the Cincinnati-based 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for Ohio. Federal appeals courts based in Denver, St. Louis, Chicago and Washington, DC, applied that same standard, according to court records. At a moment when Trump has politicized workplace diversity efforts, both the court's conservative and liberal justices – as well as the attorneys arguing the case – appeared to agree that the 6th Circuit's analysis was wrong. The case landed on the Supreme Court's docket last fall, about a month before Trump was elected on a pledge to clamp down diversity and inclusion efforts in both the government and the private sector. The administration has taken a number of steps in that direction, including but attempting to cut funding to entities federal officials allege have supported DEI efforts. Many of those actions are being reviewed by courts. But Ames' case was more procedural. Notably, both the Trump and Biden administrations agreed that the 6th Circuit should reconsider its approach. CNN's Hannah Rabinowitz contributed to this report. This story has been updated with additional developments.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israel's Saar urges Germany to be open to new Gaza aid mechanism
Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar has called on Germany to be open to the distribution of humanitarian aid to people in the Gaza Strip via newly established centres operated by the Israel-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF). "This effort has the potential to release the Palestinian population from the chokehold of [Palestinian group] Hamas and to enable the end of this war," Saar said in Berlin following a meeting with his German counterpart Johann Wadephul. The new relief efforts by the GHF have come under increasing scrutiny as they bypass international aid organizations including UN efforts. There have been Palestinian reports that people looking to receive aid at the new centres were killed by Israeli shelling. The Israeli military and the US-based GHF have denied the accusations. While critics have accused the GHF of endangering civilians who have to make their way through the embattled Gaza Strip to reach the distribution centres, Saar said the new system allows aid to reach Gazans directly, without Islamist Hamas militants being able "to take advantage of the aid." "We believe that expanding it will help shorten the war."
