In an unprecedented and sweeping move, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has revoked Harvard University’s ability to enroll international students, escalating a months-long legal and political standoff between the Ivy League institution and the Trump administration. The decision, announced Thursday, immediately affects more than 6,800 international students and threatens to further destabilize higher education’s already strained relationship with federal oversight.
The revocation came just days after Harvard refused to comply with what it called “overbroad and legally questionable” data requests from DHS. The demands, part of a federal investigation into alleged antisemitism, campus unrest, and purported ties to the Chinese government, were seen by Harvard officials as both intrusive and retaliatory.
Federal Concerns and Allegations
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem defended the decision, citing Harvard’s failure to provide requested information related to crimes or misconduct by foreign students and the university’s refusal to make “basic assurances of legal compliance.” Noem pointed to allegations of antisemitic incidents on campus, threats to student safety, and “suspicious” connections to Chinese state-linked entities as justification.
“It is a privilege, not a right, for universities to host international students,” Noem said in an official statement. “Harvard repeatedly failed to meet its obligations under federal law. As a result, its certification under the Student and Exchange Visitor Program has been revoked.”
This move effectively strips Harvard of its legal authority to sponsor student visas. International students currently enrolled must transfer to another institution or risk losing their legal immigration status.
A Troubled Backdrop
The decision caps off a tense spring between Harvard and the White House. In April, the federal government froze $2.2 billion in research funding earmarked for Harvard after the university refused to shut down its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Harvard responded with a lawsuit, arguing the administration’s actions were politically motivated and violated constitutional protections for academic freedom and due process.
Harvard President Alan Garber stated at the time, “Before taking punitive action, the law requires that the federal government engage with us about the ways we are fighting and will continue to fight antisemitism. Instead, the government’s April 11 demands seek to control whom we hire and what we teach.”
The clash over the student visa program appears to be a continuation of that dispute, now with more tangible consequences for thousands of students and the institution’s global standing.
Harvard’s Response
The university quickly condemned the latest move, warning of serious consequences for both the school and the broader U.S. academic community.
“We are fully committed to maintaining Harvard’s ability to host our international students and scholars, who hail from more than 140 countries and enrich the university and this nation immeasurably,” said Jason Newton, Harvard’s director of media relations. “This retaliatory action threatens serious harm to the Harvard community and our country and undermines Harvard’s academic and research mission.”
University officials say they are preparing legal options and emergency support for impacted students, including assistance with transfers and immigration counsel.
What’s at Stake
The decision comes at a critical moment for U.S. higher education, which has seen declining foreign enrollment amid increasing visa restrictions and geopolitical tensions. Harvard’s international students make up 27% of its student body, a sharp increase from 19.7% in 2010. These students contribute significantly to university revenue, often paying full tuition and other costs that can total nearly $87,000 annually.
Losing the ability to host them could deliver a blow to Harvard’s financial stability, its academic diversity, and its reputation as a global institution. Moreover, immigration and legal experts warn that the move could set a dangerous precedent for government interference in academic affairs.
Looking Ahead
The administration's crackdown is already generating a firestorm of criticism from academic and civil liberties groups, many of which see it as a politically charged assault on the independence of higher education.
“This isn’t about security—it’s about punishment,” said a representative from the American Association of Universities. “It’s about sending a message that any institution that defies this administration’s ideological agenda will be made to pay a steep price.”
Legal experts expect a rapid challenge in federal court, where the university will likely argue that the revocation violates the Administrative Procedure Act and possibly First Amendment protections.
