SEVIS Chaos: What Universities and DSOs Must Know Before Advising Students to Leave*
SEVIS Chaos: What Universities and DSOs Must Know Before Advising Students to Leave
By John Z. Huang and Yilun Hu
April 20, 2025
I. Overview of the SEVIS Termination Crisis
In recent weeks, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has abruptly terminated the electronic records of thousands of international students in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), causing widespread panic and uncertainty in higher education. SEVIS is the federal database used to monitor international students’ status; ordinarily, when a student’s SEVIS record is terminated for a visa violation, it signifies the end of the student’s lawful status in the United States. Since late March 2025, however, DHS’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has unilaterally deleted or marked as “terminated” an unprecedented number of student records—estimates range from over 800 students notified as of early April to as many as 1,200 or more by mid-April.[1] Reports indicate that more than 180 colleges and universities nationwide have identified students whose visa status was suddenly revoked or altered by federal officials, often without warning or clear explanation.[2] This wave of SEVIS terminations has affected campuses across the country, including institutions in Illinois, New Hampshire, Michigan, California, and many other states. International students from a diverse range of programs—from undergraduates to Ph.D. candidates—have been caught up in this enforcement surge.
The situation is fluid and urgent. International students who find their SEVIS record “terminated” face immediate and dire consequences: their ability to continue studies, work at on-campus jobs or internships, travel internationally, or even remain in the United States is thrown into question. Many affected students received no prior notice from DHS or their schools. In numerous cases, universities only discovered the termination after the fact, during routine checks of the SEVIS database or when students came forward with alarming correspondence from the government. [3] For example, Dartmouth College officials in New Hampshire learned that two of their graduate students’ SEVIS records had been terminated only when staff proactively checked the database; DHS had provided no direct notice to the school.[4] In Illinois, Designated School Officials (DSOs) at institutions like the University of Illinois Chicago and Northwestern University have been “scrambling to find ways to help” students whose status was erased, despite having no clear indication which students might be targeted next or why.[5] The lack of transparency from federal authorities about the basis for these terminations has left both students and school officials in a state of confusion and fear.
Compounding the uncertainty, some students learned of their predicament not from their university at all, but from terse communications issued by the U.S. Department of State. One University of Illinois Chicago graduate, for instance, received an ominous email on April 3 from the State Department stating that “additional information became available” after his visa was issued, and warning that if he remained in the U.S. he could face fines, detention, or deportation. That notice provided no specific reasons and no opportunity to respond or appeal. It even cautioned that deportation could occur without allowing the student to “secure possessions or conclude affairs” and that he might be removed to a country other than his homeland. [6]Messages like these—essentially telling students “you no longer have legal status, leave immediately or face removal”—have been sent to hundreds of students nationwide, often with similarly vague justifications. Faced with such warnings, some students have preemptively left the United States, essentially self-deporting out of fear, while others have gone into hiding or stopped attending classes in person, terrified that ICE agents could show up to detain them on campus.[7]
II. Conflicting Views on Legal Status: DHS’s Position vs. Reality
This crisis has put universities in an extraordinarily difficult position, caught between alarming government actions and unclear legal guidance. On one hand, DHS officials insist that a SEVIS record termination does not, by itself, strip a student of lawful status, arguing that SEVIS is “simply a database” and that removing a name from it “does not control or even necessarily reflect whether a student has lawful nonimmigrant status.”[8] In a sworn affidavit submitted in ongoing litigation, Andre Watson, a senior Homeland Security official, emphasized that DHS’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) “has never claimed that it had terminated the nonimmigrant status” of the students in question by updating the SEVIS system.9 Watson noted that the authority to revoke a visa lies with the Department of State, not DHS, and thus DHS contends that terminating a SEVIS entry “does not effectuate a visa revocation.”[9] In other words, the government’s lawyers are now downplaying the effect of these actions, suggesting that a student might still be in valid F-1 status even if the SEVIS record is gone.
On the other hand, immigration law experts and universities overwhelmingly view a SEVIS termination as tantamount to a loss of status, and with good reason. DHS’s own published guidance states that when a student’s SEVIS record is terminated for a violation, the student must “either apply for reinstatement, or…leave the United States immediately.”10 No grace period is given in such cases, and any active F-1 benefits (such as employment authorization) are effectively voided the moment the record is terminated.[10] In practice, a terminated SEVIS record means the student is no longer recognized by the system that governs their legal stay: they cannot obtain travel signatures or transfer to another school, and they will appear as out-of-status in any routine immigration query by authorities. As one DSO plainly put it, “If their official position is you don’t need SEVIS to stay in school… I’d love to see that regulation.” [11] The normal “rules of the road” for international student compliance have been turned upside down. Under ordinary circumstances, universities—not ICE—terminate SEVIS records, and only for clear-cut infractions like failure to enroll full-time, unauthorized employment, or other definitional status violations. Here, by contrast, the government is unilaterally voiding records without prior notice or an opportunity for the student (or school) to respond, a move that immigration attorneys say “blows past every procedural safeguard in the book.”[12]
The conflicting messaging from DHS has left schools in a bind. On one side, federal filings claim “no change” in legal status has occurred, implying students could theoretically continue studying. On the other, the practical reality is that without an active SEVIS record, students cannot function: for instance, they are unable to produce a valid Form I-20 or active SEVIS ID if needed for work authorization, driver’s license renewal, or any immigration benefit. Indeed, affected students report being told by various authorities that “they no longer have legal status in the U.S., and they have to leave the country immediately.” [13] University administrators are understandably wary of allowing someone to continue studying who might be deemed unlawfully present—yet they also recognize that these students have done nothing wrong to warrant such extreme treatment. The lack of any clear basis or explanation for the terminations has made it nearly impossible for universities to advise students.
III. Government Justifications and the Scope of the Crackdown
The Trump administration has offered only cryptic and shifting justifications for this mass action. In litigation and public statements, officials have pointed to two main rationales: (1) alleged criminal activity or security concerns identified through record checks; and (2) an “ideological” screening policy targeting students for their political speech (particularly protests related to the Israel–Palestine conflict). The criminal records angle has been prominently cited by DHS in court filings. Federal attorneys argue that under immigration regulations, the agency may terminate a student’s eligibility to stay in the U.S. if the student turns up in a criminal history search.[14] In the batch of terminations thus far, DHS did in fact annotate many SEVIS records with a cause code stating: “Otherwise failing to maintain status – individual identified in criminal records check.”4 However, universities and lawyers who have reviewed the cases say that almost none of these students have actually been convicted of any crime whatsoever. The legal standard for terminating an F-1 student for criminal conduct, by DHS’s own regulations, is generally a conviction for a crime of violence or felony (typically one with a potential sentence of more than one year).[15] By contrast, the “criminal record” triggers in these terminations appear to include minor infractions or mere encounters with law enforcement: for example, one University of Wisconsin student had his status revoked after a single disorderly conduct arrest in which no charges were filed; another student’s record was terminated after a DUI arrest that never led to a conviction.16 Several students (including plaintiffs in lawsuits) have no criminal record at all, apart from things as trivial as a traffic ticket or an incident report where they were never charged. In one case, DHS cited a student’s past “encounter” with border agents—specifically, the student had once withdrawn an application for admission at the airport—as part of its rationale.[16] Immigration attorneys describe these justifications as pretextual and flimsy. As one federal judge observed, the government has “offered nothing to suggest [the student] is undeserving of a degree after years of effort and tuition, much less should be deported… before completing [the] degree.”[17]
The second rationale is even more troubling: evidence has emerged that the administration is using Executive Orders on “ideological vetting” to target students (and even scholars or lawful permanent residents) who have engaged in campus activism, particularly pro-Palestinian or other dissenting speech. Nineteen state Attorneys General, including those of California and Illinois, filed an amicus brief on April 11 calling the visa cancellations part of an “Ideological Deportation Policy” that violates First Amendment rights.[18] They point out that in the last month, hundreds of students and even some faculty have had their visas revoked or been subjected to removal for expressing political opinions the administration dislikes. DHS’s pattern of who is being targeted appears inconsistent: alongside students flagged for trivial “criminal” issues are students who participated in campus protests or belong to groups critical of government policies. This has raised serious concerns that the crackdown is not truly about public safety or status violations, but about silencing opposition and creating a climate of fear.
IV. Legal Challenges and Court Developments Nationwide
Unsurprisingly, this spate of SEVIS terminations has prompted a flurry of emergency lawsuits across the country. By mid-April, at least a dozen or more separate cases had been filed on behalf of affected international students, in jurisdictions including New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Michigan, Indiana, California, Washington State, Illinois, and others.[19] The legal claims generally assert that DHS’s actions violate the Administrative Procedure Act (as arbitrary, capricious, and beyond the agency’s authority) and the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause (for stripping students of a property or liberty interest—i.e., their student status—without notice or opportunity to be heard). In many instances, plaintiffs have sought immediate relief in the form of Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs) or preliminary injunctions to halt DHS from enforcing the terminations and to prevent deportation of the students while the case is litigated.
The early results in court have been largely favorable to the students. Judges in multiple jurisdictions have recognized the grave harm and likely unlawfulness of the government’s actions, and they have issued orders to protect students from removal. For example, on April 10, a federal judge in New Hampshire granted a TRO restoring the F-1 status of a Dartmouth Ph.D. student whose SEVIS record had been terminated without cause.20 The court found the student was likely to succeed on his claims that DHS had no regulatory authority to do what it did, noting that agency attorneys could not articulate any valid legal justification for the termination at the emergency hearing.[20] Similarly, in Massachusetts, Judge Patti Saris intervened to block ICE from arresting a Chinese undergraduate at MIT who was just weeks away from graduation, remarking in open court that “This is popping up all over the country” and expressing concern that the government had “canceled their legal basis for being in the U.S.” without proper process.[21] In Wisconsin, a judge issued a TRO after a student’s status was revoked over a dismissed misdemeanor, writing that there was no indication this student did anything to warrant such drastic punishment or removal prior to finishing his degree. And in Montana, a federal judge ordered DHS to fully restore the active status of two Montana State University students (from Iran and Turkey) who had been similarly targeted, underscoring that neither had any criminal conviction or disqualifying conduct and that summarily ending their studies would serve no legitimate purpose.[22]
These court orders are significant: they not only prevent the immediate deportation of the students in those cases, but also direct the government to treat the students as still in valid status (often by reopening or reactivating their SEVIS records). The New Hampshire TRO, for instance, required DHS to reinstate the Dartmouth student’s SEVIS record, thereby allowing him to continue his program and work as a research assistant pending further proceedings.20 Each judge to rule in favor of the students has highlighted the irreparable harm that would result if the terminations were enforced—loss of educational opportunity, income, and the life disruption of being uprooted and barred from reentry. Importantly, these judges have also signaled that the students have a strong likelihood of success on the merits, given the apparent legal defects in DHS’s approach. The consensus emerging from the courts so far is that DHS cannot simply erase a student’s legal status by administrative fiat without following the regulations and due process.
It should be noted that not every court outcome is known at this time, and some cases remain pending. Meanwhile, new lawsuits continue to be filed almost daily.
V. Implications for Students: Unlawful Presence, Work Authorization, and Travel
While the legal battles play out, the practical implications for affected students are severe. A terminated SEVIS record triggers a cascade of immigration consequences. First and foremost is the risk of being classified as “out of status” and accruing unlawful presence in the United States. F-1 students normally enjoy a “duration of status” admission (marked D/S on their I-94 record), which means they are not accruing unlawful presence as long as they maintain their student status. However, if DHS considers a student’s status ended as of the termination date, the student could be deemed unlawfully present from that point forward. Accumulating more than 180 days of unlawful presence would make the student subject to a 3-year reentry bar (and more than one year triggers a 10-year bar). In these cases, it is ambiguous whether unlawful presence is ticking – DHS’s public stance (that status isn’t terminated) would suggest not, but if the government were to reverse course or if an immigration judge later finds the person out of status, those penalties could come into play. This uncertainty is another reason why immediately leaving the U.S. (to “stop the clock”) may not be the best course – especially if, as seems likely, the terminations will be found unlawful. A student who departs might trigger the need for a new visa to return, and with a termination and revocation on record, obtaining a new visa will be exceedingly difficult.
In addition, students whose SEVIS records are terminated lose their ability to work or receive practical training, which can cause irreparable professional and financial harm. Many of the students in question were engaged in on-campus jobs, research assistantships, or Optional Practical Training (OPT) internships. The moment their SEVIS status went to “terminated,” their employers and school payroll offices faced a legal quandary: continuing to employ someone who is not in valid status could violate immigration rules. Some students have already been forced to stop working, losing critical income and, for graduate students, potentially jeopardizing their funding for tuition and living expenses.4 For those about to graduate or recent graduates, the stakes are even higher—without active status, they cannot start OPT or apply for transitional visas like the H-1B. As the Bloomberg Law news service reported, this cancellation of status is “jeopardizing [the] H-1B talent pipeline” for U.S. employers, since talented graduates are suddenly in limbo instead of starting jobs that were lined up post-graduation.19 Even if a student eventually wins in court and gets reinstated, the lost time and opportunities can’t be recovered. One immigration attorney compared terminating SEVIS to “removing a leg from a table – the table isn’t necessarily gone, but it’s not functional either.”11 In short, the students’ lives are put on hold, and their future plans—whether continuing education or starting a career—are thrown into chaos.
Travel is another major concern. Students whose visas have been revoked (as many have) cannot travel outside the U.S. and expect to return easily. If they leave the country now, they will need to apply for a new visa at a U.S. consulate to come back and resume studies. That process is fraught with uncertainty in the best of times, but here, each of these students now has a termination and prior revocation on their record. At a minimum, they would face additional scrutiny and delays in visa processing, and many may simply be found ineligible for a new F-1 visa. The past visa revocation will “loom over” any future consular interview, likely prompting questions and suspicion, even if the student was completely innocent of any wrongdoing.23 As one immigration lawyer noted, “If they leave and file for a visa, will they even get it?”—highlighting the risk that by departing, a student could be effectively shutting the door on their U.S. education permanently.23 This is precisely why rushing to depart the United States is not a decision to take lightly. Unless a student has pressing personal reasons to go home, departing in the middle of this murky situation could foreclose the very relief that courts are now beginning to grant. Staying (lawfully) in the U.S. to fight for one’s status—while continuing studies if possible—is for many the only way to preserve the chance of completing their degree or training.
VI. Guidance for Schools and DSOs: Supporting Students Amid Uncertainty
For universities and Designated School Officials, navigating this crisis requires a delicate balance of compliance, advocacy, and compassion. The central recommendation is that schools should not rush to disenroll students or pressure them into leaving the country solely because their SEVIS record was terminated by DHS. In this extraordinary moment, a conservative, bureaucratic response (such as immediately terminating the student’s enrollment or reporting them to ICE) could needlessly ruin academic careers and plays directly into the government’s harshest tactics. Instead, institutions should focus on protecting their students’ educational opportunities while the legal issues are sorted out. Here are key considerations:
1. Maintain Enrollment and Campus Access
Absent a clear legal requirement to do so, do not cancel the student’s course registrations or campus housing. Universities have discretion in how they handle an administratively terminated SEVIS record on the academic side. Some schools have placed affected students on an “administrative hold” or continued enrollment pending resolution. This ensures the student can keep attending classes (whether in person or virtually) and complete the semester. Losing student status in SEVIS does not automatically require expulsion from the school; these students have paid tuition and are willing to continue their studies. By keeping them enrolled (even if quietly), the school preserves the argument that the student is actively pursuing their program – which could be helpful if and when the student applies for reinstatement or seeks court relief. It also avoids the perverse outcome of the student being academically derailed even if their legal status later gets restored. In Illinois, universities ranging from UIC to Northwestern have indicated they are trying to keep students on track academically despite the uncertainty.5 This is the humane and sensible approach.
2. Don’t Trigger Unnecessary ICE Action
DSOs are typically required to report certain changes in student status, but in these cases the change was initiated by ICE itself. There is no need to affirmatively “invite” further ICE attention. For example, if a student’s SEVIS record is terminated by ICE, the DSO should not attempt to manually re-terminate or do any additional data entry that could confuse matters. Instead, document the date and details of what occurred and any communications with the student, and maintain that in the student’s file. In some cases, ICE has reportedly followed up terminations with visits or checks to see if the student has departed.10 Cooperate with lawful inquiries, but remember that the student may have counsel who should be involved in any communication with ICE about their case. It is perfectly acceptable to inform ICE that the student is seeking reinstatement or other administrative relief and that the school is awaiting further guidance from the government or the courts.
3. Assist with Reinstatement or Transfers if Viable
In limited cases, some students may pursue an administrative reinstatement of status through USCIS (a process where the student admits a status violation but asks USCIS to excuse it and restore F-1 status). Normally, reinstatement is only granted if the violation was beyond the student’s control or related to reduced course load, etc., and it requires a new SEVIS record to be created by the DSO. Here, reinstatement might be a long shot (and could be mooted by ongoing litigation), but DSOs should be prepared to issue new Initial I-20s for this purpose if the student chooses that route. Keep in mind that filing a reinstatement application will toll unlawful presence while it’s pending, which could be a strategic interim benefit. Alternatively, if a student is close to graduation or otherwise cannot get relief, transferring to a different U.S. institution is practically impossible without active status—unless the student departs the U.S. and tries to re-enter with a new Initial I-20. Given the re-entry risks, that is generally not advisable now. Still, DSOs can consult with counsel on whether any creative solutions (such as deferred attendance or a change to another status) might exist for specific cases. The key is to explore all options short of telling the student to pack up immediately.
4. Encourage the Student to Seek Legal Counsel
Most affected students will benefit greatly from experienced immigration counsel guiding their next steps. Many law school clinics, ACLU chapters, and private immigration attorneys have already mobilized to assist. Schools should be ready to refer students to known legal resources. In some instances, it may be appropriate for the university itself to support litigation – either by joining an amicus brief or by providing factual affidavits about the impact on the institution. If a court in your jurisdiction has issued an order covering students (even non-party students), make sure the administration knows; some TROs might be crafted broadly enough to protect similarly situated individuals, not just the named plaintiffs.
5. Communicate Carefully and Consistently
It’s crucial for the international office to maintain open lines of communication with any affected student – and indeed with the wider international student community, which is understandably anxious right now. Schools should send out general notices acknowledging the situation (without causing alarm), affirming that the institution stands by its students and is monitoring legal developments. Stress that students who receive any communication about visa or status issues should contact the international office immediately so that no one falls through the cracks. For those already impacted, private, empathetic advising sessions are called for. When talking to an affected student, do not blame or shame the student – it’s clear that these actions are not a result of the student’s misconduct, so reassure them of that. At the same time, avoid making false promises; you may explain that at present the student’s ability to continue working or traveling is suspended, but that the university will do everything it can to support them in resolving the situation. Documentation of all such communications is wise. Consistency is also key: mixed messages can add to the panic. Designate a point person (or team) in the international office for this issue so that inquiries can be routed appropriately.
Finally, do not pressure students into “voluntary” departure as an easy solution. From a pure risk-avoidance perspective, a school might think it cleaner if the student departs and tries to sort things out from abroad. However, as discussed, leaving the U.S. could irreparably harm the student’s prospects. A university should not act as an arm of ICE by facilitating self-deportation. Remember that these students were fully legally present and compliant until DHS’s abrupt action. Many of them have been in the U.S. for years, invested significant resources in their education, and have no home, coursework, or job waiting for them back in their country on a moment’s notice. Telling them simply to go home is not a neutral or safe recommendation—it could upend their lives. Instead, provide them with information and support so they can make an informed decision in consultation with legal counsel. Our role in the higher education community must be to mitigate that fear, not amplify it.
VII. Guidance for Students: Know Your Rights and Take Action
For international students facing a SEVIS termination, the situation is scary, but you are not alone and you do have rights. Here are some steps and considerations:
1. Stay Enrolled and Attend Classes (If Safe):
If your university allows you to continue your coursework (and we encourage them to do so), try to keep up with your studies. This serves two purposes: it maintains your progress toward the degree (important if relief comes) and it demonstrates your good faith compliance with the academic requirements of your visa status. If you are fearful of attending in person (for example, if there have been instances of ICE agents on campus), speak with your DSO or academic advisor about the possibility of remote participation or other accommodations. In one case, students in Michigan were able to continue their classes remotely after they stopped going in person due to fear of arrest.13 Each situation will differ, but do not simply drop out unless you have no other choice.
2. Consult an Immigration Attorney Immediately
Given the fast-moving legal challenges, you should get advice specific to your circumstances as soon as possible. An attorney may advise joining an existing lawsuit or filing one on your behalf. If litigation isn’t an option, the attorney might help you prepare a reinstatement petition or liaise with DHS/SEVP for clarification. Many non-profit organizations (like the ACLU, American Immigration Lawyers Association chapters, and immigrant rights clinics) are actively assisting students pro bono or at reduced cost. Do not assume you can navigate this alone; the legal issues are complex, and a lawyer can also interface with your school and ICE so that you don’t have to directly, which can provide some peace of mind.
3. Document Everything
Keep careful records of all communications related to your case. Save any emails or letters from the State Department, DHS, or your school about the termination. Make a timeline of events (when you last entered the U.S., when you last registered in SEVIS, any interactions with police or authorities that might be relevant). This information will be crucial for any legal remedy. Also, if you were employed on campus or on OPT, gather proof of the impact (such as a letter from your supervisor noting you had to stop working). This can help establish irreparable harm in court, bolstering your case for emergency relief.
4. Avoid Travel
As discussed, leaving the U.S. right now is extremely risky. Unless there is an absolute emergency that requires travel, it is generally better to remain in the country while your status is being contested or clarified. Travel to even Canada or Mexico could result in you being unable to return. If you must travel (and again, get legal advice before you do), be prepared for the possibility that you will need to apply for a new visa and that it could be denied or delayed.
5. Don’t Violate Other Laws or Rules
It might go without saying, but in this heightened environment, it is critical not to give ICE any independent reason to target you. That means strictly obey the law, no matter how minor the infraction, and adhere to all university rules. Do not engage in unauthorized employment, even if you lost your job—working without authorization now would complicate a future reinstatement. If you drive, be meticulous about following traffic rules. Essentially, keep a low profile and let the focus remain on the government’s overreach, not anything you did.
6. Lean on Campus Support Systems
Universities are increasingly aware of the mental and emotional toll this situation is taking. Seek out international student services, counseling services, or trusted faculty mentors to talk through your concerns. At many campuses, fellow students and staff have rallied around affected individuals with solidarity and practical support, such as emergency funds, legal clinics, etc. Remember that you are a valued part of your academic community; you have allies, even if the government is treating you unfairly.
VIII. Conclusion
The current SEVIS termination crisis is a fast-evolving challenge that tests the resilience of our legal and educational systems. For schools and DSOs, the charge is to respond not with panic or perfunctory policy, but with level-headed commitment to your students’ well-being and rights. This means resisting the impulse to cut loose a student at the first sign of trouble. Instead, institutions should stand firm, knowing the courts have already begun to affirm that these terminations are likely improper. By providing a supportive environment and access to resources, schools can give students the chance to seek justice without the immediate threat of academic ruin or deportation.
For students, the message is equally one of cautious hope: do not despair, and do not rush to self-deport out of fear. The government’s own lawyers now admit that a SEVIS termination is not the final word on your legal status. You have avenues to fight back, and early victories in court show that judges across the country recognize the law is on your side. The harm being done—to your education, your career, and your life—is something courts do not take lightly, nor should you. Every day, more allies are stepping forward to challenge these terminations and demand a return to fairness and due process.
In the coming weeks, we expect further legal clarification. It is possible that a nationwide injunction or policy reversal will occur, which would immediately stabilize the situation. Until then, prudence and patience are key. Universities should continue to closely monitor updates from the lawsuits and any DHS statements. DSOs in particular should keep an ear to official channels (like SEVP field guidance) in case DHS provides instructions or—ideally—reverses the terminations. Congressional and public pressure is also mounting, which could influence how long this campaign continues.
Above all, remember that a SEVIS termination is not the same as a deportation order. For now, no student should be forced out of the country without a fight, and no school should act as if these terminations are beyond challenge. By staying informed, providing clear-headed guidance, and asserting the rights of students to fair treatment, schools and students together can weather this storm. In the interim, the priority is to do no further harm: keep students safe, keep them enrolled, and give them the dignity of a process to defend their place in our academic communities.
An international student’s dreams should not be so summarily erased, nor their contributions cast aside, without due process and lawful justification.
*Disclaimer:
This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Viewing or relying on this content does not create an attorney-client relationship. Individuals facing SEVIS termination, visa revocation, or related immigration issues should consult with a qualified immigration attorney to discuss their specific situation.
[1] Lisa K. Philip, Visa terminations causing panic for Illinois students and educators, WBEZ Chicago (Apr. 16, 2025); Johanna Alonso, Trump Admin Downplays Impact of Terminating International Students From Key Database, Inside Higher Ed (Apr. 16, 2025).
[2] Deena Zaru, International students sue after Trump administration terminates their legal status, ABC News (Apr. 15, 2025).
[3] Vidushi Sharma, Two Dartmouth students’ F-1 student immigration statuses revoked, The Dartmouth (Apr. 7, 2025) (updated Apr. 9, 2025); Philip, supra note 1.
[4] Id; ACLU of New Hampshire, Press Release: ACLU-NH Files Suit on Revoked Student Status of Dartmouth PhD Student (Apr. 7, 2025).
[5] Philip, supra note 1.
[6] Id; see also State of California ex rel. Rob Bonta, Press Release: Attorney General Bonta Files Brief Challenging Trump Administration’s Unjustified and Unconstitutional Revocation of Student Visas (Apr. 11, 2025).
[7] Alonso, supra note 1; Zaru, supra note 2.
[8] Zak Toomey, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Gov’t Response to Pls.’ TRO Motion at 6–7, Xiangyun Bu et al. v. Noem, No. 2:25-cv-11038 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 15, 2025); see also Alonso, supra note 1.
[9] Affidavit of Andre Watson, Assistant Director, Homeland Security Investigations (Apr. 2025), referenced in Alonso, supra note 1 (quoting Watson: “Terminating a record within SEVIS does not effectuate a visa revocation” and SEVP has no statutory authority to terminate status via SEVIS updates).
[10] See U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Study in the States – Terminate a Student (SEVIS Help Hub) (last updated Nov. 7, 2024) (in cases of status violation, “No grace period” and student “must either apply for reinstatement, or … leave the United States immediately.”); Inside Higher Ed, supra note 1 (noting DHS’s own student guidance contradicts its litigation stance).
[11] Alonso, supra note 1 (noting experts agree terminated SEVIS record normally signals loss of status and departure requirement); Nate Raymond & Kristina Cooke, Foreign students in US mount court challenges as Trump ends their legal status, Reuters (Apr. 16, 2025) (noting prior to this, terminations typically followed initiation of removal proceedings for significant violations, not before).
[12] Raymond & Cooke, supra note 11.
[13] Zaru, supra note 2.
[14] Raymond & Cooke, supra note 11 (government claims it can end students’ eligibility if they turn up in a criminal history search); Watson Affidavit, supra note 9.
[15] See, e.g., 8 C.F.R. § 214.4(a)(3)(ii) (permitting termination of student status for conviction of a crime of violence or other serious offenses); Reuters, supra note 11 (stating by statute criminal activity justifying termination is defined as violent crimes with potential sentence >1 year).
[16] Zaru, supra note 2 (complaint noting “what seems to connect” targeted students is merely “some encounter with some American law enforcement official… no matter how innocuous,” including traffic warnings or withdrawing an application for admission at the border).
[17] Raymond & Cooke, supra note 11.
[18] Bonta, supra note 6 (describing “Ideological Deportation Policy” based on executive orders directing revocation of visas for students engaging in disfavored speech, and noting hundreds of students and even some legal residents targeted for views on political issues); J. Sellers Hill, Pritzker Says Harvard Is ‘All Over’ Supporting Students Whose Visas Were Revoked, The Harvard Crimson (Apr. 9, 2025) (discussing visa revocations of Harvard students involved in pro-Palestine protests).
[19] Andrew Kreighbaum, Lawsuits Over Foreign Students’ Status Find Solid Legal Footing, Bloomberg Law (Apr. 15, 2025) (noting a “slew of lawsuits” filed in federal courts in New York, California, Michigan, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Washington, etc., and that more are being filed almost daily); Alonso, supra note 1 (at least 50 students suing across 16 lawsuits as of mid-April).
[20] Liu v. Noem, No. 1:25-cv-00133 (D.N.H. Apr. 10, 2025) (order granting TRO) (finding plaintiff likely to succeed on APA and regulatory violation claims, and noting loss of status exposes student to detention and deportation); Kreighbaum, supra note 19 (reporting Dartmouth student obtained emergency order restoring F-1 status).
[21] Raymond & Cooke, supra note 11.
[22] Id.