A U.S. federal judge has temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s attempt to revoke Harvard University's certification to enroll international students — a move seen as part of a broader campaign by the former president to pressure academic institutions into aligning with his political agenda.
This decision came after Harvard filed an emergency lawsuit on Friday, calling the administration’s action a “blatant violation” of the U.S. Constitution and federal law. The school argued that revoking its Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification would effectively erase 27% of its student body — over 6,800 international students — and wreak havoc on its academic operations just before graduation.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs, an Obama appointee, issued a temporary restraining order halting the policy. Harvard said the decision to decertify came “with the stroke of a pen” and amounted to illegal retaliation against the university for defending academic independence and free speech.
Context of the Revocation
The Department of Homeland Security, led by Kristi Noem, announced the revocation on Thursday, claiming that Harvard:
-
Fostered antisemitism and violence on campus,
-
Failed to condemn anti-Israel activism, and
-
Maintained links with the Chinese Communist Party.
Noem stated Harvard could avoid the revocation if it provided surveillance data on international students and recordings of protest activity within 72 hours — a demand Harvard condemned as illegal and coercive.
Political and Legal Fallout
This move is seen as part of a larger conservative crackdown on institutions that maintain independence from the Trump-aligned Republican base:
-
Trump allies have tried to deport foreign students involved in pro-Palestinian protests.
-
He has encouraged the impeachment of judges for rulings he opposes.
-
Several elite law firms that hired lawyers who challenged Trump have faced administrative pressure.
-
In contrast, firms like Paul, Weiss and Skadden Arps have cooperated with the administration and taken on pro-Trump legal causes.
Meanwhile, Columbia University made concessions to keep federal funding after being accused of fostering antisemitism, agreeing to review Middle East studies and campus discipline.
Harvard's Pushback
Harvard President Alan Garber accused the government of retaliating for the university’s refusal to “surrender its academic independence.” In a strongly worded message to the university, Garber reiterated that Harvard had followed all legal requirements in dealing with Homeland Security and called the revocation effort “arbitrary and unlawful.”
The university claims the action:
-
Violates First Amendment rights,
-
Interferes with academic freedom,
-
And has a devastating real-time impact on thousands of international students, faculty, and research programs.
Harvard has also previously challenged the Trump administration over $3 billion in federal grant freezes and remains at the center of legal resistance to Trump-era education policies.
This ruling offers temporary relief for Harvard and its international community, but the case sets up a high-stakes battle over executive overreach, campus free speech, and the future of foreign students in American higher education.
