Judge halts plan to block foreign students from Harvard
A judge has blocked President Donald Trump's administration from implementing his plan to bar foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard University.
US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued an injunction barring Trump's administration from carrying out its latest bid to curtail Harvard's ability to host international students amid an escalating fight pitting the Republican president against the prestigious Ivy League school.
The preliminary injunction extends a temporary order the judge issued on June 5 that prevented the administration from enforcing a proclamation Trump signed a day earlier that cited national security concerns to justify why Harvard could no longer be trusted to host international students.
She ruled after Trump's Friday announcement that his administration could announce a deal with Harvard "over the next week or so" to resolve the White House's campaign against the university, which has waged a legal battle against the administration's various actions against the school.
Trump signed the proclamation after his administration had already frozen billions of dollars in funding to the oldest and wealthiest US university, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status and launched several investigations into the school.
The proclamation prohibited foreign nationals from entering the US to study at Harvard or participate in exchange visitor programs for an initial period of six months, and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to revoke visas of international students already enrolled at Harvard.
But Burroughs said Trump's administration was likely violating Harvard's free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment by retaliating against it for refusing to meet its demands to cede control over the school's curriculum and admissions and by targeting it based on what officials viewed as the university's left-leaning orientation.
The judge said "at its root, this case is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism."
"Here, the government's misplaced efforts to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this administration's own views, threaten these rights," she wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Almost 6,800 international students attended Harvard in its most recent school year, making up about 27 per cent of its student population.
A judge has blocked President Donald Trump's administration from implementing his plan to bar foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard University.
US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued an injunction barring Trump's administration from carrying out its latest bid to curtail Harvard's ability to host international students amid an escalating fight pitting the Republican president against the prestigious Ivy League school.
The preliminary injunction extends a temporary order the judge issued on June 5 that prevented the administration from enforcing a proclamation Trump signed a day earlier that cited national security concerns to justify why Harvard could no longer be trusted to host international students.
She ruled after Trump's Friday announcement that his administration could announce a deal with Harvard "over the next week or so" to resolve the White House's campaign against the university, which has waged a legal battle against the administration's various actions against the school.
Trump signed the proclamation after his administration had already frozen billions of dollars in funding to the oldest and wealthiest US university, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status and launched several investigations into the school.
The proclamation prohibited foreign nationals from entering the US to study at Harvard or participate in exchange visitor programs for an initial period of six months, and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to revoke visas of international students already enrolled at Harvard.
But Burroughs said Trump's administration was likely violating Harvard's free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment by retaliating against it for refusing to meet its demands to cede control over the school's curriculum and admissions and by targeting it based on what officials viewed as the university's left-leaning orientation.
The judge said "at its root, this case is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism."
"Here, the government's misplaced efforts to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this administration's own views, threaten these rights," she wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Almost 6,800 international students attended Harvard in its most recent school year, making up about 27 per cent of its student population.
A judge has blocked President Donald Trump's administration from implementing his plan to bar foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard University.
US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued an injunction barring Trump's administration from carrying out its latest bid to curtail Harvard's ability to host international students amid an escalating fight pitting the Republican president against the prestigious Ivy League school.
The preliminary injunction extends a temporary order the judge issued on June 5 that prevented the administration from enforcing a proclamation Trump signed a day earlier that cited national security concerns to justify why Harvard could no longer be trusted to host international students.
She ruled after Trump's Friday announcement that his administration could announce a deal with Harvard "over the next week or so" to resolve the White House's campaign against the university, which has waged a legal battle against the administration's various actions against the school.
Trump signed the proclamation after his administration had already frozen billions of dollars in funding to the oldest and wealthiest US university, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status and launched several investigations into the school.
The proclamation prohibited foreign nationals from entering the US to study at Harvard or participate in exchange visitor programs for an initial period of six months, and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to revoke visas of international students already enrolled at Harvard.
But Burroughs said Trump's administration was likely violating Harvard's free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment by retaliating against it for refusing to meet its demands to cede control over the school's curriculum and admissions and by targeting it based on what officials viewed as the university's left-leaning orientation.
The judge said "at its root, this case is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism."
"Here, the government's misplaced efforts to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this administration's own views, threaten these rights," she wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Almost 6,800 international students attended Harvard in its most recent school year, making up about 27 per cent of its student population.
A judge has blocked President Donald Trump's administration from implementing his plan to bar foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard University.
US District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston issued an injunction barring Trump's administration from carrying out its latest bid to curtail Harvard's ability to host international students amid an escalating fight pitting the Republican president against the prestigious Ivy League school.
The preliminary injunction extends a temporary order the judge issued on June 5 that prevented the administration from enforcing a proclamation Trump signed a day earlier that cited national security concerns to justify why Harvard could no longer be trusted to host international students.
She ruled after Trump's Friday announcement that his administration could announce a deal with Harvard "over the next week or so" to resolve the White House's campaign against the university, which has waged a legal battle against the administration's various actions against the school.
Trump signed the proclamation after his administration had already frozen billions of dollars in funding to the oldest and wealthiest US university, threatened Harvard's tax-exempt status and launched several investigations into the school.
The proclamation prohibited foreign nationals from entering the US to study at Harvard or participate in exchange visitor programs for an initial period of six months, and directed Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider whether to revoke visas of international students already enrolled at Harvard.
But Burroughs said Trump's administration was likely violating Harvard's free speech rights under the US Constitution's First Amendment by retaliating against it for refusing to meet its demands to cede control over the school's curriculum and admissions and by targeting it based on what officials viewed as the university's left-leaning orientation.
The judge said "at its root, this case is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism."
"Here, the government's misplaced efforts to control a reputable academic institution and squelch diverse viewpoints seemingly because they are, in some instances, opposed to this administration's own views, threaten these rights," she wrote.
The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Almost 6,800 international students attended Harvard in its most recent school year, making up about 27 per cent of its student population.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
39 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
The View hosts slammed as ‘anti-American' for bashing Trump's attack on Iran
Strelmark President Hilary Fordwich slams the hosts of The View for criticising US President Donald Trump's element of surprise on his attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. 'Something that I find very disappointing is how much more anti-American can you be than not be behind our men and women of the special forces that flew over there, in harm's way, went on a secret mission,' Ms Fordwich told Sky News Digital Presenter Gabriella Power. 'How can you not be behind them? 'President Trump didn't even lie. 'I thought it was brilliantly done, brilliant deception and brilliant element of surprise.'
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Benjamin Netanyahu confirms Israel has agreed to ceasefire with Iran
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has confirmed his government has agreed to a ceasefire with Iran. In a statement released this afternoon, the Prime Minister's Office said a meeting of Israel's security cabinet last night backed US President Donald Trump's proposal for a truce. Mr Netanyahu's office claimed Israel's "Operation Rising Lion" was a "tremendous success" and had achieved all of its objectives and more. "Israel has removed a dual immediate existential threat — both in the nuclear and ballistic missile fields," it said. "In addition, the IDF has achieved full air control over Tehran's skies, inflicted severe damage on the military leadership, and destroyed dozens of central Iranian government targets." The statement added that in the past 24 hours, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had killed hundreds of Basij operatives and another nuclear scientist. "In light of achieving the objectives of the operation, and in full coordination with President Trump, Israel has agreed to the president's proposal for a bilateral ceasefire," the statement said."Israel will respond forcefully to any violation of the ceasefire." Earlier today, just after 8am AEST (6pm Washington time), Mr Trump announced that a ceasefire would begin at about 2pm AEST. "It has been fully agreed by and between Israel and Iran that there will be a Complete and Total CEASEFIRE … for 12 hours, at which point the War will be considered, ENDED," he wrote on social media. He said 24 hours after the ceasefire began, an "official end" to the war would be "saluted by the world".
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
By design or accident, Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant
America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options. Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability". Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany. Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts. Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship. In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement. Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms. Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not. Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through. By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing. In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful. Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack. This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power. For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion. READ MORE: It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction. Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right. Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs, Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself. Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride. America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options. Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability". Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany. Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts. Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship. In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement. Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms. Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not. Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through. By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing. In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful. Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack. This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power. For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion. READ MORE: It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction. Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right. Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs, Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself. Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride. America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options. Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability". Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany. Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts. Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship. In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement. Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms. Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not. Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through. By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing. In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful. Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack. This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power. For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion. READ MORE: It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction. Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right. Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs, Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself. Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride. America will always do the right thing, once it has exhausted the other options. Wrongly attributed to Winston Churchill, this quip has chimed down the years because it so aptly conveys the raffish nature of American "dependability". Britain's indefatigable wartime PM spent two years petitioning Roosevelt to bring an isolationist America to the European war, knowing it alone was key to defeating Nazi Germany. Then, as today, the American voter had no appetite for foreign conflicts. Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu may now share this exasperated view of American friendship. In the hubristic hours after America's historic bunker-busting attack on Iran's subterranean nuclear sites, Bibi gushed in vindication, welcoming Trump's full-throated involvement. Barely a day later, the Israeli found himself almost as cornered as Tehran's mullahs when Trump insisted that both sides lay down their arms. Whether this was always his plan - a cunning strategic manoeuvre by Trump and his military advisers - or if it merely turned out like this, almost doesn't matter. A deep thinker Trump is not. Yet Trump's ceasefire is a rare kind of brilliant, and one Netanyahu, who desperately courted the B2 attack, should have thought through. By summarily neutralising Iran's nuclear capabilities (assuming this has been achieved with 14 "massive ordnance penetrators" and two-dozen submarine-launched cruise missiles), Trump also removed Netanyahu's dubious "casus belli", his singular justification for launching missiles and central excuse for continuing. In fact, the legality of Israel's unheralded bombardment was never there and that, in turn, made America's "Operation Midnight Hammer" equally unlawful. Under international law, one country can only pre-emptively defend itself from another where it has evidence that it is about to come under armed attack. This legal prerequisite once mattered - even to an exceptionalist super power. For all the risible dot-joining of the "sexed up" dossier proffered to the UN against Saddam Hussein's Iraq back in 2003, there was at least an attempt by Britain and America to build a sufficient legal basis for invasion. READ MORE: It is a mark of how far the international rules-based order has slipped, that neither Netanyahu nor Trump, felt any pressure to furnish evidence of Iran's possession or imminent use of a weapon of mass destruction. Under Trump, America has unpicked its own post-war settlement and is now embracing a new-old world order of might-is-right. Still, what's done cannot be undone and it has changed everything. With the first-ever deployment of the 13,000-kilogram MOPs, Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised according to the President himself: "Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success," Trump skited from the White House on Sunday morning. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Completely and totally obliterated. This also applies to continuing the war itself. Bibi might have remembered that although America entered WWII reluctantly, come the D-Day landings launched from England in June 1944, it was Eisenhower in charge. Churchill was merely along for the ride.
