A federal judge has stopped the new US rule that would have replaced “duration of status” with a “fixed period of admission” for international students, effective from September 15, giving these students temporary relief.
U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted nationwide preliminary relief in the lawsuit challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) final rule ending the Duration of Status (D/S) policy for international students, exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign media.
The court blocked the rule from taking effect from September 15, and stopped DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from putting it into place while the case continues. As a result, the existing Duration of Status framework stays in place nationwide, for now.
Why Did the Judge Push Back on the Rule?
The judge pointed to several reasons why the rule needs a re-look. According to Inside Higher Ed, “The government’s contention that the rule is necessary to safeguard national security borders on the absurd,” Saylor wrote in the memorandum released Monday night. “It is based almost entirely on a small handful of anecdotes, each of which involved incidents that the new rule would do nothing to prevent or even mitigate.”
Saylor wrote multiple times that DHS had no response to the plaintiffs’ arguments. He also called the regulation “misguided,” “ill-advised,” “questionable,” and damaging to the United States, but made clear the injunction does not rest on those opinions: “The role of the judiciary is not to ensure that the executive branch does not make unwise decisions.”
What Would Have Changed for Students Under the Rule
The final rule ending Duration of Status (D/S) would have replaced the current flexible system with one that admits students for a fixed period of time, specifically, only until the program end date on their SEVIS document, but not exceeding four years.
In simple terms, this means international students and exchange visitors would have had to apply for extensions of stay instead of relying on an open-ended status tied to their coursework.
The rule also would have restricted students’ ability to change educational objectives, transfer institutions, or pursue additional programs of study.
Together, these changes would have created uncertainty for students, added burdens for institutions, and caused serious ripple effects for programs such as Optional Practical Training (OPT) and H-1B that connect education to the U.S. workforce.
The new rules would have required F-1 visa students to follow a fixed period of admission and an extension of stay (EOS) procedure in the US, instead of the “duration of status” system, which allowed for an unspecified period of study.
F-1 visa holders and certain other students would have been admitted to the United States for a fixed period of time, up to the length of the program of study listed on their Form I-20, but this will not exceed four years, plus a 30-day period for arrival and an additional 30-day period for departure.
So, Is the Rule Gone for Good?
Not yet. After the court’s ruling, a preliminary injunction has been granted to postpone the September 15 implementation date for the D/S rule. In the meantime, the government can be expected to appeal the injunction.
This is a preliminary injunction, not a final ruling, so the lawsuit still seeks to vacate the rule entirely. A status conference is set for October 2, according to Inside Higher Ed.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, immigration, or tax advice. Immigration laws and government policies are subject to frequent change without notice. Financial Express is not responsible for any decisions made based on this information.