Harvard wins temporary reprieve from Trump administration's foreign students ban. What happens now?

A United States federal judge has extended a crucial legal block against the Trump administration’s move to bar Harvard University from enrolling international students, offering the Ivy League institution temporary reprieve.

On Thursday, US District Judge Allison Burroughs, who presides in Boston, announced she would issue a preliminary injunction to preserve Harvard’s ability to sponsor international students while the case unravels in court, shielding thousands of students from potential deportation and academic disruption.

What’s behind the Harvard vs Trump clash

Harvard’s clash with the Trump administration forms part of a wider, ongoing confrontation between elite academic institutions and federal authorities.

The government has, in recent months, escalated efforts to scrutinise Ivy League universities on grounds ranging from antisemitism and political bias to alleged foreign ties.

US Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem had earlier ordered the immediate revocation of Harvard’s certification under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP), which governs the eligibility of academic institutions to host international students on US visas.

A May 22 letter from DHS cited failure to comply with federal information requests and alleged involvement in activities ranging from fostering antisemitism to coordination with the Chinese Communist Party — claims that Harvard has denied.

In response, Harvard filed a lawsuit accusing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of violating administrative procedures and retaliating against the university for political reasons. The legal filing highlighted the university’s belief in academic freedom and constitutional protections.

In its court filing, Harvard described DHS’s move as an “unprecedented and retaliatory attack on academic freedom,” and claimed that the school was being punished for refusing to align its internal policies and governance with the administration’s political agenda.

Why judge ruled in favour of Harvard

During the hearing, Judge Burroughs, an appointee of former US President Barack Obama, expressed doubt over the government’s handling of the matter.

She questioned whether DHS had fully complied with her prior temporary restraining order and highlighted a declaration from Harvard stating that some international student visas had already been revoked despite the order being in effect.

Burroughs said she would maintain the restraining order as both sides worked out the terms of a preliminary injunction. She also expressed concern that the legal battle might ultimately return to the same point of conflict even after administrative procedures were followed.

“Aren’t we still going to end up back here at the same place?” she asked, signalling scepticism that the government’s 30-day notice to Harvard constituted a meaningful departure from its earlier approach.

The administration’s revised stance came just hours before the court session, with DHS now offering Harvard a 30-day window to respond to its accusations and prove that it remains compliant with SEVP standards.

This shift marked a retreat from its initial order, which had taken immediate effect and bypassed standard procedural safeguards.

Despite the shift, Harvard maintains that the government’s revised letter still fails to provide legal grounding or identify specific regulations that the university allegedly violated.

How students reacted to the temporary reprieve 

The courtroom drama unfolded as Harvard students were celebrating commencement just a few miles away in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The ceremony highlighted the international fabric of the institution, which draws a large segment of its student body from abroad.

University president Alan Garber, addressing the graduates, said, “from down the street, across the country and around the world,” drawing particular applause when he pointed out the global nature of Harvard’s community. “Around the world – just as it should be,” he added, earning a standing ovation.

More than 25 per cent of Harvard’s overall student population is international, including nearly 60 per cent of graduate students at the Harvard Kennedy School.

The stakes of the court case are therefore immense, not only for the institution but also for thousands of students and researchers who rely on its sponsorship for their US legal status.

One high-profile student affected is Belgium’s Princess Elisabeth, who recently completed her first year in a Harvard graduate programme.

What next for Harvard vs Trump

Harvard officials and legal representatives have warned that even with the restraining order in place, the government’s actions have already triggered widespread disruption.

In a court affidavit, Maureen Martin, the university’s Director of Immigration Services, noted a surge in anxiety and logistical complications for international students.

Martin stated that international students arriving in Boston were being subjected to enhanced screening by Customs and Border Protection, while many students seeking visas abroad were facing delays or outright denials. She described the situation as causing “profound fear, concern, and confusion.”

Over 7,000 international students, scholars, and alumni engaged in post-graduate career training programmes depend on Harvard’s SEVP certification. The potential revocation, Martin warned, could upend multiple graduate programmes that rely heavily on foreign enrollment.

The university’s legal team also cited the “immediate and irrevocable” harm that would result from revoking Harvard’s ability to host non-US students, noting the broader economic and reputational fallout such a move would carry.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem said the university had failed to comply with wide-ranging requests for data on foreign students, including records of disciplinary actions or any involvement in activities considered “dangerous or violent.”

In parallel, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that the administration would begin “aggressively” revoking visas of Chinese students suspected of ties to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in strategic fields, though he did not specify which disciplines were involved.

The move has sparked concern among students and universities alike, particularly given that more than 275,000 Chinese students currently study in the US, constituting a major source of revenue and research talent.

Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, said, “Chinese students, in particular, now that they’re being faced with hyper-scrutiny, are looking elsewhere. That is a huge loss for us. It’s a brain drain.”

The university is also pursuing a separate legal action over the administration’s decision to terminate nearly $3 billion in federal research funding.

Following Burroughs’ temporary restraining order last week, Trump responded on social media, saying, “the best thing Harvard has going for it is that they have shopped around and found the absolute best Judge (for them!) – But have no fear, the Government will, in the end, WIN!”

While Harvard has secured a temporary lifeline, the dispute is far from resolved. The Department of Homeland Security’s 30-day notice remains active, and unless permanently blocked, could still result in the withdrawal of Harvard’s SEVP certification if the agency deems the university non-compliant.

With inputs from agencies