The U.S. federal government has widened the list of reasons international students can lose their legal status, intensifying fears among thousands of foreign students already unsettled by a recent crackdown under the Trump administration. Immigration attorneys argue that these expanded justifications enable swifter deportations and serve to rationalize actions taken earlier this year to revoke many students’ permission to study in the U.S.
Many international students found themselves suddenly stripped of their legal standing, often without warning or explanation. This abrupt shift prompted a wave of legal challenges in federal courts, where several judges issued preliminary rulings asserting that the government had failed to provide due process in revoking the students’ status.
Following these legal challenges, federal officials announced they would draft new guidelines to govern the cancellation of student status. According to a document from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) submitted Monday in court, one of the new permissible reasons is the revocation of the visa students used to enter the United States. This marks a stark change in policy. Previously, students whose visas were revoked could typically remain in the country to complete their studies but would be barred from reentering if they left.
“This just gave them carte blanche to have the State Department revoke a visa and then deport those students, even if they’ve done nothing wrong,” said Brad Banias, an immigration lawyer representing a student affected by the crackdown. His client had a traffic offense on his record, which was included in a law enforcement database accessed by immigration officials.
Banias noted that this new rule significantly broadens ICE’s authority. Prior to this, visa revocation alone was not considered sufficient grounds for terminating a student’s legal presence in the U.S.
Over the past month, foreign students across the country have been shocked to find that their names were deleted from a student-tracking database managed by ICE. Some students went into hiding to avoid being deported, while others chose to return to their home countries, abandoning their academic pursuits.
As legal challenges continued to grow, the government announced on Friday that it would temporarily reinstate the legal status of international students while it worked on formalizing a new policy. That new guidance surfaced in court just days later.
Charles Kuck, an Atlanta-based immigration attorney representing 133 students who lost their status, said the updated policy permits revocations if a student’s name appears in criminal or fingerprint databases in ways previously not allowed. “Basically, they’re trying to cover what they already did bad by making the bad thing that they did now legal for them to do,” said Kuck.
Numerous students affected by these policy changes had only minor legal issues on their records, such as traffic infractions. Others were left completely in the dark about why they had been targeted.
In one legal case, attorneys for the government provided partial clarity during a hearing involving Akshar Patel, a student in Texas pursuing studies in information systems. His status was revoked and later reinstated, prompting him to ask the court to prevent his deportation.
During court proceedings and in official filings, Department of Homeland Security officials disclosed that they had cross-referenced the names of student visa holders with the National Crime Information Center (NCIC), a comprehensive FBI-run database. This system includes details about criminal suspects, missing persons, and individuals who have been arrested—even if charges were never filed or had been dropped.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes revealed during the hearing that about 6,400 students were flagged in the database sweep. Patel was one of them; he had been charged with reckless driving in 2018, a charge that was ultimately dismissed. That outcome, though, was still logged in the database.
Patel’s name appeared in a list of 734 students compiled in a spreadsheet that was forwarded to a Homeland Security official. Within just 24 hours of receiving it, the official instructed others to “Please terminate all in SEVIS,” referring to the system that tracks international students’ legal status.
Judge Reyes said the rapid response indicated that no individualized review of the records had taken place to determine why the students’ names were in the NCIC. “All of this could have been avoided if someone had taken a beat,” she remarked. Reyes, who was appointed by President Joe Biden, criticized the federal government’s actions, stating it had shown “an utter lack of concern for individuals who have come into this country.”
As ICE was revoking students’ legal status, the U.S. State Department was also canceling some of the visas used by these students to enter the country. Secretary of State Marco Rubio indicated that some of these cancellations were prompted by students’ participation in pro-Palestinian protests, which he claimed threatened U.S. foreign policy interests. However, Rubio admitted in March that certain visa cancellations had “nothing to do with any protests” but were based on “potential criminal activity.”
Rubio explained his rationale to reporters: “My standard: If we knew this information about them before we gave them a visa, would we have allowed them in? If the answer is no, then we revoke the visa.” He further emphasized his stance, declaring, “Your visa is expired, your visa is revoked, you have to leave. There is no right to a student visa.”
The government’s actions caused widespread confusion and panic on college campuses. Universities that discovered their international students had lost legal status were thrown into disarray. In earlier cases, institutions typically updated a student’s legal status only after reporting that they were no longer enrolled. This time, however, the revocations seemed to originate directly from federal authorities.
In some instances, colleges instructed students to immediately cease attending classes or working on campus, warning them they could face deportation if they remained.
Government attorneys later argued that changes in the student database didn’t necessarily equate to a loss of legal status. Although some students were flagged as “failure to maintain status,” officials said the changes were meant as investigative alerts rather than definitive rulings.
Patel’s legal presence in the U.S. was confirmed during the hearing. “He is lawfully present in the U.S.,” stated Andre Watson of the Department of Homeland Security. “He is not subject to immediate detention or removal.”
While Judge Reyes declined to issue a preliminary injunction, she encouraged both legal teams to negotiate a resolution that would ensure Patel could remain in the country.