Stronger Together
How to challenge immigration policies that are harming higher ed
⚠️ You have free article remaining.
Log in or become a member for unlimited access.
In spring 2025, fear, anxiety, and uncertainty spread across the nation’s campuses as the US State Department revoked visas for thousands of international students and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminated records in the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System (SEVIS), which tracks the status of international students in the United States. These federal actions came without any warning, and the SEVIS terminations upended decades of existing procedures and regulations. Campuses scrambled to identify and support affected students. Numerous international students, fearing what might happen to them, departed the country in the middle of their academic programs. Although DHS reactivated the students’ SEVIS records in April 2025 under pressure from mounting lawsuits, the State Department did not undo the visa revocations, and the Trump administration has continued to defend its authority to terminate students’ SEVIS records based solely on visa revocations.
But court challenges have given international students and institutions some hope and relief. In March 2026, higher education won a significant victory when a federal district court in Massachusetts allowed a lawsuit to proceed challenging the mass visa revocations and SEVIS terminations. In rejecting the federal government’s move to dismiss the lawsuit, brought by the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration (where I serve as president and CEO) and the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, the court pointed to serious legal concerns with the policies around the visa revocations and SEVIS terminations and how they were carried out. The court also recognized the continuing harm that federal immigration actions are causing: falling international student enrollment, new barriers to hiring and retaining international talent, fears of unexplained and sudden immigration activity on campuses, and efforts to weaken protections for undocumented immigrants, such as the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program (DACA).
Despite the legal victory in the ongoing visa and SEVIS suit, adverse immigration actions still pose threats for campuses. These actions include the Department of Justice’s lawsuits targeting tuition equity for undocumented students in thirteen states thus far, which affect hundreds of thousands of immigrant students and could result in the loss of significant tuition revenue and students for institutions. The Trump administration has also issued executive orders and introduced rules that make it far more difficult for colleges and universities to use H-1B visas to hire international graduates, faculty, and professionals, which could lead to an even greater decline of their presence on US campuses, revenue drops, and the loss of a generation of international talent.
So, how can we in higher education push back on questionable and unlawful policy actions and defend our students and faculty? Here are important points to keep in mind.
Challenging the current administration’s actions and policies in court is a priority. Beyond the advancement of the legal challenges that led DHS to restore SEVIS records, court decisions in other cases have found the Trump administration’s policy to revoke visas based on political speech to be unconstitutional, halted its effort to limit Harvard University’s ability to enroll international students, suspended the $100,000 fee for H-1B visas, and forced the administration to proceed with processing asylum and other immigration applications of individuals from countries under a US travel ban. While judges have stayed some of these decisions as the government pursues appeals, legal action can make a difference and change what DHS and the Department of State are allowed to do.
Most recently, the Presidents’ Alliance along with NAFSA: Association of International Educators, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, and several unions filed a lawsuit to challenge the administration’s final rule ending the Duration of Status (D/S) framework for international students, exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign media. The rule will create significant uncertainty and administrative burdens for international students and exchange visitors and the institutions that support them. It will also interfere with academic decision making, disrupt students’ educational and professional plans, and undermine the ability of US colleges and universities to attract and retain global talent. Impressively, fifteen colleges, universities, and university systems submitted declarations providing evidence of the rule’s harmful impacts.
Higher education leaders and their boards can support legal challenges brought by organizations like the Presidents’ Alliance (which brings together leaders from nearly six hundred colleges and universities to address immigration issues affecting their campuses) by submitting information that documents the harms their institution is experiencing; they do not need to serve as named plaintiffs. Institutional leadership can also join amicus briefs to provide the perspective of higher education. Each institution needs to engage in its own risk assessment. Even when an institution decides “to keep its head down,” the federal government may still target it. Not every legal challenge will succeed, but if we do not push back against harmful immigration policies, then collectively higher education will lose.
Protecting one’s campus and community members can make a difference. Standing up for individual students, faculty, and staff has become a reality for a growing number of institutions. When Annie Ramos, an undocumented Arizona State University student, was detained in April 2026, TheDream.US—the largest college scholarship organization for undocumented immigrant students—quickly publicized what happened, while ASU engaged their congressional representatives, and Arizona Senator Mark Kelly successfully intervened with DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin to seek Ramos’s release. Efforts like these, particularly engaging with state and local lawmakers, are meaningful even if they aren’t always successful. An institution’s actions can send important signals of support and solidarity to the broader campus community and alumni.
Columbia University’s response to the detention of a student in February 2026 underscores the steps that all colleges and universities can adopt to prepare for potential immigration enforcement activity. The university acted swiftly and publicly after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents entered a residential building and detained a student living there. It quickly alerted the campus community, contacted elected officials, and publicly questioned federal agents’ behavior and tactics, clearly stressing that law enforcement officials may not enter private campus spaces without a judicial warrant. Columbia’s response was far different from the year before when ICE detained graduate student Mahmoud Khalil in university-owned housing. While the university had already delineated nonpublic campus spaces before the 2025 incident, it has since amplified its campus communication and education, enabling it to move quickly in February 2026 and provide greater support for students and staff.
Avoiding preemptive or overcompliance helps prevent harm. Since early 2025, the Trump administration has sought to sway institutions to comply with unfounded interpretations of existing regulations and laws by issuing misleading policy guidance, proposing new rules, threatening investigations, and filing lawsuits. For example, the government’s General Services Administration has proposed rule updates that would require federal grant recipients to certify compliance with a new immigration-related provision. Because the provision referenced language from the federal “harboring” law—which in part prohibits acts of concealing, harboring, or shielding a person from detection—several higher education institutions and associations mistakenly interpreted the provision as barring institutional support for undocumented students. Already attuned to the dangers of preemptive compliance, several institutions contacted the Presidents’ Alliance with urgent queries, and we quickly disseminated broader guidance explaining why providing education, tuition, scholarships, enrollment, and housing to undocumented students does not by itself constitute harboring. The new provision was likely intended to intimidate, not illuminate.
Standing up for our campuses and students need not equate to speaking out publicly. Campus leaders and teams equipped with accurate, vetted resources and guidance that allow them to effectively navigate the continuing slew of immigration actions—without overly or preemptively complying—and to communicate clearly are making a difference.
At the same time, college and university leaders must urgently educate and engage with federal and state policymakers. Durable immigration solutions will require listening, compromise, empathy, and dialogue across political and ideological differences. Beyond engaging with policymakers on the Hill or in their state capitals, college and university leaders and their teams have a role to play as convenors who bring together their surrounding community, campus voices, and local, state, and federal policymakers. The Presidents’ Alliance has partnered with Braver Angels and its Citizens Commission on Immigration to uplift shared values that include the vital role immigration plays in our local communities. As we look forward to the coming academic year, colleges and universities can leverage opportunities to host or convene “common ground” workshops, debates, dialogues, and community forums on immigration and integrate them into broader efforts to identify pragmatic bipartisan solutions to our current immigration challenges.
Whether supporting litigation, ensuring clear protocols and communications on campus, intervening for an individual student, standing up publicly, or engaging in conversations with policymakers, higher education leaders and stakeholders can help hold the current administration fully accountable for harmful and/or unlawful immigration policies. While the specific actions that individual colleges and universities pursue can depend on a host of factors, including their location, whether they are public or private, and their international and immigrant student population, the time to act is now. Even more, what we do collectively to support immigrant, international, and refugee students, graduates, staff, and faculty will strengthen not only higher education but also workforce development, economic prosperity, and America’s global competitiveness.
This essay has been updated from the print version to include information about the lawsuit over the rule ending the Duration of Status (D/S) framework.
STAY INFORMED
Check out these resources for more information on how to prepare and protect your campus.
Campus Preparedness Toolkit: Immigration Enforcement
Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration
Rights & Protection Hub: Guidance for Institutions and Noncitizen Students
Illustration by Daniel Stolle
Exclusive Content