BOSTON, UNITED STATES: A U.S. District Court has temporarily halted the Trump administration’s attempt to revoke Harvard University’s ability to enrol foreign students.
Judge Allison Burroughs issued the two-week restraining order on 23 May 2025, granting Harvard a brief reprieve while the court reviews the legality of the federal decision.
The ruling follows a lawsuit filed the same day by Harvard in Boston’s federal court, where the university claimed the revocation violated the U.S. Constitution, particularly the First Amendment.
Harvard alleged that the action was retaliatory, targeting the institution for refusing to comply with what it called “political demands” from the White House.
Harvard currently enrols nearly 6,800 foreign students, most of them in graduate programmes, and has argued that the impact of the policy would be “immediate and devastating.”
According to the lawsuit, over 7,000 visa holders faced potential deportation, while future international enrolment could be blocked for at least two academic years.
Harvard stated, “With the stroke of a pen, the government has sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body.”
The court’s decision provides temporary relief, but the matter remains unresolved. Hearings are scheduled for 27 and 29 May to assess further legal steps.
Judge Burroughs wrote that Harvard had shown it could suffer irreparable harm if the government’s action were allowed to proceed before a full hearing.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the move on 22 May, citing claims that Harvard fostered “anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators” and collaborated with the Chinese Communist Party.
No supporting evidence for those claims was publicly released. Harvard denies any wrongdoing and insists its policies uphold campus safety and academic integrity.
DHS Secretary Kristi Noem demanded that Harvard submit extensive data on foreign students, including records of protest involvement, within 72 hours. Harvard said it had already submitted thousands of data points but received no clarification from DHS on perceived deficiencies.
The revocation would also financially strain Harvard, as international students typically pay full tuition, helping subsidise domestic financial aid programmes.
In court documents, Harvard said the move could force it to rescind admission offers, disrupt clinics and academic labs, and damage the university’s global standing.
Harvard President Alan Garber denounced the administration’s actions as “illegal attempts to assert control over our curriculum, faculty, and student body.”
He further accused the government of “retaliation” and reaffirmed the university’s commitment to academic independence.
Critics of the administration, including former Harvard President Lawrence Summers, have condemned the policy. Summers described it as “madness” and warned it would alienate future global leaders educated at U.S. institutions.
Student reaction has been similarly charged. Leo Gerden, a Swedish economics and government major, called the court ruling a “great first step,” but warned that international students were bracing for a prolonged legal battle.
Harvard has also been at the centre of wider disputes with the Trump administration. In a separate case, it is challenging more than US$2 billion in frozen federal grants.
The university alleges the administration has used funding threats and regulatory actions to punish it for resisting political pressure.
In contrast, Columbia University, also under federal scrutiny, has made concessions such as reforming its disciplinary procedures and revising Middle East studies curricula, after US$400 million in federal support was pulled.
The administration’s decision to cut Harvard’s certification has reignited debate over immigration policy, campus free speech, and political interference in higher education.
White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the court order undermined national security and immigration authority, stating, “unelected judges have no right” to overrule executive branch decisions.
The administration continues to tie its stance to growing concerns about antisemitism and foreign influence on U.S. campuses. It cited alleged Chinese military affiliations and antisemitic incidents at Harvard as justification for the punitive action.
Harvard insists it has taken steps to address antisemitism, launching initiatives in governance and transparency over the past 18 months.
A significant portion of Harvard’s foreign students—20 percent in 2024—are from China, a point of concern among some U.S. lawmakers worried about Beijing’s influence on American academia.
Burroughs’ temporary injunction delays the policy’s implementation, originally set to take effect in the 2025–2026 academic year.
The Trump administration is expected to appeal the judge’s decision.
The post Federal judge blocks Trump administration’s move to revoke Harvard’s ability to enrol foreign students appeared first on The Online Citizen.
