Lawyers for Harvard University head back to a Boston courtroom on Monday, where they will urge a federal judge to block the Trump administration’s tactics to keep international students from attending.
The hearing follows at least four different attempts by Trump administration officials to end or limit Harvard’s foreign enrollment. If they succeed, it could affect about 7,000 international scholars and potentially deliver a disabling blow to the campus’s finances, curriculum and identity.
In a court filing, the university said that Harvard students have been denied visas, detained at Boston’s Logan airport and even sent home in apparent contravention of a judge’s order.
Accusing the administration of a politically motivated crusade, Alan M. Garber, Harvard’s president, has characterized the government actions as retaliation “against Harvard for our refusal to surrender our academic independence and to submit to the federal government’s illegal assertion of control over our curriculum, our faculty and our student body.”
Harvard sued the administration last month to block its efforts to bar foreign students. A federal judge in Boston, Allison D. Burroughs, then temporarily halted the federal government’s actions.
But the situation has led to confusion among students, and many have expressed anxiety over their status, according to Harvard officials. They include some international students who are already enrolled and others headed to the school in Cambridge, Mass., for the first time this summer and fall.
In a hearing shortly after the case was filed, Judge Burroughs expressed concern about the Trump administration’s disruptive effect on the university’s longstanding tradition of hosting foreign students.
“People are afraid and reluctant to come here,” she said in court last month, adding that she wanted a “stopgap” on the harm.
Judge Burroughs asked lawyers for Harvard and the Trump administration to meet and draft an injunction, which would extend her earlier order preventing the administration from interfering with the school’s international students until the lawsuit is resolved.
The two sides, however, have been unable to agree on the language, according to court papers filed last week, in which lawyers for the Justice Department argued that Harvard wanted an “overbroad and unnecessary” order.
The only reason Harvard would want such “broad language is to sweep in other potential actions by the government,” wrote the lawyers for the Trump administration, which has accused Harvard of tolerating campus antisemitism and continuing relations with foreign entities — specifically China and Iran — that present national security concerns.
In their court filing, Harvard’s lawyers argued that broad language was necessary because the government had “committed to continuing — indeed to intensifying — its retaliatory campaign,” one that can “throw Harvard and its international community into turmoil.”
The litigation, which is one of two cases Harvard has filed against the Trump administration, began last month when the Department of Homeland Security said it was revoking Harvard’s ability to host students under a system called the Student Exchange and Visitor Program.
Soon after Judge Burroughs said she planned to impose a preliminary injunction to block enforcement of the Department of Homeland Security’s action, the White House issued a broad proclamation saying that Harvard was unfit to host students. It was an unusual use of presidential power, and it indicated that the administration was willing to use any tool in its arsenal against Harvard.
The White House proclamation was temporarily blocked. Harvard argued, however, that federal officials ignored that judicial order.
A court declaration filed by Maureen Martin, director of immigration services for Harvard, described how students “continued to suffer serious consequences.” One student bound for Harvard Medical School returned to India from Boston, two were denied visas in Munich, and a visiting professor was notified on June 8 that his visa appointment scheduled for June 11 in Tel Aviv had been canceled.
A lawyer for Harvard, Ian Gershengorn, accused the administration of resorting to “shenanigans” in its efforts to bar foreign students from Harvard.
Even before the May hearing, Secretary of State Marco Rubio had announced that he was pursuing a plan to examine the social media of international students and to block students who are members of the Chinese Communist Party.
And a State Department cable dated May 30 ordered consular offices around the world to vet the social media accounts of student visa applicants heading to Harvard for antisemitism. The cable called it a pilot program, starting with Harvard, that would be expanded.
Harvard has said the actions aren’t grounded in real violations but instead are retaliation for its refusal to bend to the administration’s will.
In April, the administration demanded that Harvard impose a series of changes in its curriculum, faculty and student body. These included a ban on admitting students deemed hostile to American values, an audit of the political ideology of students and faculty for “viewpoint diversity,” and regular status updates to the administration.
Harvard is suing separately to regain billions in federal funds the government has frozen.
Nicholas Nehamas and Edward Wong contributed reporting.
Stephanie Saul reports on colleges and universities, with a recent focus on the dramatic changes in college admissions and the debate around diversity, equity and inclusion in higher education.
The post Harvard Will Ask a Judge to Block Trump From Barring International Students appeared first on New York Times.
