A federal judge in Boston has temporarily halted a directive from former President Donald Trump that aimed to prevent foreign nationals from entering the U.S. for educational purposes at Harvard University. This ruling, rendered by U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs, centers on a two-page temporary restraining order. It effectively blocks Trump’s proclamation while the case undergoes further examination amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League institution and the former Republican president.
- Advertisement -
Judge Burroughs found that Trump’s order, which sought to bar foreign students from studying at Harvard for the upcoming six months, would result in “immediate and irreparable injury” before the courts could fully assess the situation. This isn’t the first time the judge has intervened; last month, she also stopped Trump from enforcing a separate order that would restrict Harvard’s enrollment of international students, who comprise over 25% of the student body.
Reflecting on the importance of international education, Harvard stated, “The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard’s students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.”
The judge’s order continues a previous temporary restraining order she issued on May 23, which addressed the administration’s restrictions on enrolling international students at Harvard.
Earlier, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson described Harvard as “a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators,” a claim that the university has firmly rejected.
In the court documents, Harvard argued that Trump violated federal laws concerning immigration. Jackson, in her statement, responded, saying, “Harvard’s behaviour has jeopardised the integrity of the entire U.S. student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions.”
President Trump justified his actions by citing national security concerns, claiming the need to bar international students from studying at the renowned Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. His proclamation proposed an initial six-month suspension that could be extended indefinitely, and it directed the U.S. State Department to consider revoking academic visas for any current Harvard students meeting the specified criteria.
Harvard rebuffed these claims, arguing in its filing that Trump had not substantiated his assertions regarding national security. The university noted, “The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because non-citizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States – just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard.”
The Trump administration has mounted a comprehensive challenge against Harvard, halting billions of dollars in funding and suggesting the termination of its tax-exempt status, which has faced multiple legal contests.
Read more: U.S. government revokes Harvard’s right to enroll international students
Harvard maintains that the administration’s actions are a form of retaliation for the university’s resistance to external pressures regarding its governance, curriculum, and faculty ideology. Following a statement by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on May 22, which announced the immediate revocation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, the university took legal action. Judge Burroughs quickly intervened, blocking the revocation.
Significantly, the department’s stance shifted just before a scheduled hearing last week, indicating it would pursue a more extensive administrative appeal regarding Harvard’s certification.
In her latest ruling, Judge Burroughs expressed her intent to issue a more thorough preliminary injunction at Harvard’s request, emphasizing the need for ongoing protection for the university’s international students.
Trump’s recent proclamation asserted that Harvard has a “history of concerning foreign ties and radicalism,” and accused the institution of having extensive connections with foreign adversaries, including China. He contended that the university had seen a “drastic rise in crime in recent years” while allegedly neglecting to discipline various conduct violations on campus. In response, Harvard’s filing characterized these accusations as baseless.
Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International—Monitoring.
