Harvard’s student visa lawsuit is currently blocking the Trump administration from stripping the university of its ability to enroll international students. A federal judge in Massachusetts has issued a preliminary injunction against both the Department of Homeland Security’s May 2025 revocation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification and President Trump’s June 2025 proclamation barring foreign nationals from entering the country to attend Harvard. The government’s appeal to the First Circuit is stayed, and as of early 2026 Harvard’s roughly 6,800 international students remain enrolled under the protection of the court’s order.
The Two Government Actions Harvard Is Fighting
The lawsuit challenges two separate but linked federal actions taken weeks apart.
On May 22, 2025, DHS Secretary Kristi Noem announced that Harvard had lost its SEVP certification, the federal authorization that allows a school to sponsor students on F-1 and J-1 visas. Without it, Harvard could not enroll new international students, and existing visa holders would have needed to transfer elsewhere to keep legal status. The affected population is about 6,800 students from 146 countries, roughly 27 percent of Harvard’s enrollment.1Al Jazeera. Trump Bars Harvard International Enrolment: How Many Students Will It Hurt DHS cited what it called Harvard’s “insufficient response” to an April 16, 2025 records demand seeking information on international students’ “known illegal activity,” “known dangerous or violent activity,” and discipline related to protests.2Immigration Policy Tracking. DHS Threatens to Block Harvard From Enrolling International Students Unless It Shares Student Body Records The agency framed the revocation as a response to “Pro-Terrorist Conduct” and pointed to antisemitism complaints and DEI programs.3U.S. Department of Homeland Security. Harvard University Loses Student and Exchange Visitor Program Certification The legal hook was 8 C.F.R. § 214.4(a)(2), which allows DHS to withdraw certification after an out-of-cycle review for “any valid and substantive reason.”4Center for Immigration Studies. DHS Pulls Harvard’s Student-Visa Certification Authority
After Harvard sued and a judge blocked the revocation, the administration tried a second route. On June 4, 2025, President Trump signed a proclamation titled “Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University.” It suspended for six months the entry of any foreign national coming to attend or work at Harvard on an F, M, or J visa, and directed the Secretary of State to consider revoking the visas of current Harvard students already inside the country.5The White House. Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University The proclamation invoked Sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the same authority the Supreme Court upheld in Trump v. Hawaii (2018).6The Harvard Crimson. Trump International Students Ban
The mechanisms differ in a way that matters. The DHS action used regulatory power to strip a school’s certification. The proclamation used direct presidential authority to bar individuals from entry based on where they intended to study, defining a restricted class not by nationality but by affiliation with a single American university.
Harvard’s Legal Claims
Harvard filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on May 23, 2025, the day after the SEVP revocation. The case is President and Fellows of Harvard College v. United States Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:25-cv-11472-ADB, and the defendants include DHS, the State Department, ICE, and Secretary Noem.7Harvard University. Amended Complaint, Harvard v. DHS
The complaint, later amended to cover the proclamation, rests on four claims:
- First Amendment retaliation for Harvard’s refusal to accept the administration’s demands to change its governance, curriculum, and faculty ideology.
- Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, alleging DHS bypassed the SEVP termination procedures set out in 8 C.F.R. §§ 214.4(b)–(h).
- Absence of statutory authority for the actions taken.
- Violation of procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment.7Harvard University. Amended Complaint, Harvard v. DHS8Forbes. Harvard Has Strong Chance to Prevail Over Trump in Immigration Lawsuit
How the Courts Have Ruled So Far
U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs has ruled for Harvard at every step.
Hours after the initial complaint was filed on May 23, 2025, Judge Burroughs granted a temporary restraining order blocking the SEVP revocation.9NPR. Harvard International Students Lawsuit Trump She extended that order on May 29.10NBC News. Judge Extends Order Blocking Trump Administration Revoking Harvard’s Ability to Enroll International Students When the proclamation issued on June 4, Harvard amended its complaint, and Judge Burroughs entered another TRO the following evening, finding a risk of “immediate and irreparable injury” to the university and its students.11ABC News. Harvard Calls Trump’s Proclamation to Block Foreign Students Attending University
On June 20, 2025, the court converted the restraining orders into a preliminary injunction, followed by a detailed written opinion on June 23. The opinion questioned whether Section 212(f) authorized the proclamation at all and identified several features that set the case apart from Trump v. Hawaii. The travel ban upheld in Hawaii addressed nationals from countries the government could not vet; Harvard students, by contrast, are already screened through SEVP. No prior proclamation had defined the excluded class by affiliation with a single domestic institution, which the court called an “unusual reading” of presidential authority. And because the students could still enter the United States as long as they did not attend Harvard, the order did not actually deem their entry detrimental to the country, which the court called a “perversion of the language and purpose of the statute.”12Harvard University. Memorandum and Order, Harvard v. DHS
The court found the harm, the balance of hardships, and the public interest all favored an injunction. The order required the government to prepare guidance disregarding the May 22 revocation notice, restore every affected visa holder and applicant to their prior position, and ensure no student was denied entry based on the revocation, with a compliance report due within 72 hours.13NBC News. Harvard International Students Visa: Judge Blocks Trump Administration
The Appeal and Motion to Dismiss
The government has moved on two fronts simultaneously.
On June 27, 2025, it filed a notice of appeal to the First Circuit Court of Appeals, docketed as No. 25-1627. The core argument on appeal is that “the president’s authority over immigration and foreign affairs is not subject to judicial review.”14American Council on Education. Higher Ed Groups Back Harvard in International Student Appeal
Then on August 7, 2025, the government stipulated that it would not enforce the original May 22 SEVP revocation. The next day it moved to dismiss the case, arguing the revocation challenge was moot given that stipulation, that the proclamation was a valid exercise of presidential authority, and that a separate May 28 notice of intent to withdraw Harvard’s SEVP certification was not yet ripe because no final decision had been reached.15The Harvard Crimson. DHS Moves to Dismiss Harvard opposed the motion on September 5, 2025. Harvard filed its response brief on the proclamation challenge in January 2026.16Harvard University. International Student Visas
On October 7, 2025, the First Circuit stayed the appeal after the government cited a lapse in appropriations that had suspended DOJ civil litigation. As of the last docket entry in June 2026, the stay remained in place and no oral argument had been scheduled.17CourtListener. President and Fellows of Harvard College v. United States Department of Homeland Security
What This Means for Current Students
The practical situation for Harvard’s international students has been shaped entirely by the district court’s orders. Under the preliminary injunction, Harvard’s SEVP certification is intact, the proclamation cannot be enforced against incoming or current students, and the university continues to sponsor F-1 and J-1 visa holders in the ordinary course. The government’s August 2025 stipulation not to enforce the May 22 revocation reinforces that status quo, though Harvard has continued to litigate because a separate May 28 notice of intent to withdraw certification is still on the table.
The order’s protection is tied to this specific case and the classes of visa activity the court addressed. It does not shield students from unrelated individual immigration actions, and the ultimate outcome depends on how the First Circuit rules once its stay lifts.
The Broader Fight That Shapes This Case
The visa lawsuit is one piece of a wider confrontation between Harvard and the Trump administration that began in early 2025. In March, federal agencies opened a review of Harvard’s federal contracts and grants, which totaled more than $9 billion including funding tied to affiliated hospitals.18Harvard University. Harvard Won’t Comply With Demands From Trump Administration On April 11, the administration issued demands that Harvard eliminate DEI programs, adopt merit-based hiring, restructure its leadership, and permit “viewpoint diversity” audits. President Alan Garber rejected the demands on April 14 as “unmoored from the law,” and the administration responded by freezing $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts.19ABC News. Timeline: Trump Administration’s Actions Against Harvard University
Harvard sued over the funding freeze on April 21, 2025. On September 5, 2025, Judge Burroughs ruled in that separate case that the administration had violated the Constitution and bypassed congressional procedures, describing the government’s conduct as “retaliation, unconstitutional conditions, and unconstitutional coercion” and finding it had used “antisemitism as a smokescreen for a targeted, ideologically motivated assault.” She ordered the freeze on more than $2 billion in research grants lifted.20American Council on Education. Federal Court Harvard Ruling
A separate ruling with implications for international students on campuses generally came in AAUP v. Rubio. On September 30, 2025, Judge William G. Young issued a 161-page ruling finding the administration’s policy of targeting international students and faculty for pro-Palestinian speech violated the First Amendment, holding that noncitizens in the United States “unequivocally” hold the same free speech rights as citizens. On January 22, 2026, Judge Young entered a final order vacating the policy and ruling that any future adverse immigration action against AAUP or MESA members during the litigation period would be “presumed retaliatory unless the government can demonstrate otherwise by clear and convincing evidence.”21Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration. Visa Revocation Litigation22AAUP. AAUP Litigation The government has appealed that decision to the First Circuit as well.
Harvard’s case has drawn institutional support from across higher education. The American Council on Education and 22 other national associations filed an amicus brief in the First Circuit on January 20, 2026, and Yale joined a separate brief signed by 47 other universities.14American Council on Education. Higher Ed Groups Back Harvard in International Student Appeal23Yale Daily News. Yale Joins Brief Backing Harvard’s International Students Lawsuit