Judge blocks Trump ban on Harvard's international students
A U.S. federal judge said on Thursday she would extend an order blocking President Donald Trump's administration from immediately revoking Harvard University's ability to enroll international students, a victory for the Ivy League school that is entangled in multiple battles with the administration.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs in Boston announced her intention to issue a preliminary injunction, six days after she first granted Harvard a temporary order blocking the Trump administration's move.
As the court hearing unfolded on Thursday morning, thousands of Harvard students were receiving their degrees at the school's commencement ceremony on campus about 8 kilometers away.
University President Alan Garber, who received a standing ovation, welcomed graduating students "from down the street, across the country and around the world," drawing applause for the last words.
"Around the world — just as it should be," he added.
The Trump administration has launched a multifront attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding, proposing to end its tax-exempt status and opening an investigation into whether it discriminated against white, Asian, male or straight employees or job applicants.
Revoking Harvard's ability to enroll international students would be damaging, the school says. More than a quarter of the student body is international; nearly 60% of the graduate students at the prestigious Harvard Kennedy School hail from other countries.
The attack on Harvard is part of the administration's broader effort to pressure higher education institutions to align with its policy agenda.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the administration would start "aggressively" revoking visas issued to Chinese students attending U.S. schools, including those with ties to the Chinese Communist Party and those studying in critical fields, which he did not specify.
More than 275,000 Chinese students are enrolled in hundreds of U.S. colleges, providing a major source of revenue for the schools and a crucial pipeline of talent for U.S. technology companies. The decision prompted despair and frustration among students who have offers to attend next year.
Prior to Rubio's announcement, the offensive against U.S. colleges had largely been confined to Ivy League schools such as Harvard, Columbia and the University of Pennsylvania, which it has accused of left-wing bias and antisemitism.
Lynn Pasquerella, president of the advocacy group American Association of Colleges and Universities, said the Trump administration's targeting of international students would have negative consequences for schools and the U.S.
"Chinese students, in particular, now that they're being faced with hyper-scrutiny, are looking elsewhere," she said. "That is a huge loss for us. It's a brain drain."
The court hearing before Burroughs took place shortly after the administration softened its stance in an apparent effort to refute Harvard's legal arguments in advance.
Late Wednesday night, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security sent a notice to Harvard saying it would now give the university 30 days to submit evidence contesting the administration's plan to revoke Harvard's right to enroll non-U.S. students.
The notice signaled a change in course for DHS, which had said last week that the revocation was effective immediately. In its lawsuit challenging the move, Harvard argued that DHS had violated federal administrative procedure.
During the court hearing, U.S. Department of Justice attorney Tiberius Davis argued there was now no need for a court order blocking the administration's actions, since Harvard could challenge them via an administrative process.
But Burroughs, an appointee of Democratic former President Barack Obama, said she believed a broad preliminary injunction protecting Harvard and students was necessary while that process played out.
She expressed skepticism that Harvard's fate would be any different at its conclusion, saying, "Aren't we still going to end up back here at the same place?"
She also questioned whether the administration had fully complied with her temporary restraining order, pointing to a declaration Harvard submitted on Wednesday that said visas for incoming students had been recently revoked.
Burroughs said the temporary order would remain in effect while lawyers for both sides negotiate over the terms of the injunction.
Harvard has called DHS's action part of an "unprecedented and retaliatory attack on academic freedom." The school is pursuing a separate lawsuit challenging the administration's decision to terminate nearly $3 billion in federal research funding.
Harvard argues the Trump administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to its demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students.
In announcing the initial decision to revoke Harvard's certification, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, without providing evidence, accused the university of "fostering violence, antisemitism, and coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party."
She accused the school of refusing to comply with wide-ranging requests for information on its student visa holders, including whether they engaged in any activity that was illegal, violent or subjected them to discipline.
The department's move would prevent Harvard from enrolling new international students and require existing ones to transfer to other schools or lose their legal status.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Times
29 minutes ago
- Japan Times
Honda supplier rethinks China relationship as trade war bites
As the U.S.-China trade war expands into the auto, steel and rare earths sectors, few companies are feeling the pressure more than top Japanese car parts supplier Daido Steel. The supplier to Honda and other major marques is facing a trio of headwinds: a 50% tariff on U.S. imports of steel, a 25% duty on foreign-made cars and a levy on parts, and China's tightening of exports of rare earths — minerals critical to make magnets for car motors. "They've started putting up walls,' CEO Tetsuya Shimizu said in an interview at Daido Steel's headquarters in Nagoya. "This will have a massive impact on the stability of the global economy.' It's also having major implications for the sprawling network of specialty manufacturers that are critical to the global automotive industry and now find themselves stuck between feuding superpowers. For Daido Steel, the trade war has meant renewing a push to build rare earth supply routes outside of China, which accounts for almost 70% of mined material and about 90% of global refining of the metals. Some new routes are already starting to form, mainly from Australia, and Shimizu said there's potential in the United States, Canada and Brazil. But progress has been slow due to high costs and low supply, he said, underscoring the immense challenge facing the world's efforts to wean from dependence on China. Daido Steel's struggles also signal the true toll of the trade war on the auto sector will be magnitudes more than the billions of dollars forecast by top carmakers including Ford and Toyota. And the constant roller coaster of escalating, then deescalating, tensions has left companies scrambling to maintain business ties under a cloud of uncertainty. When U.S. President Donald Trump initially imposed 25% tariffs on steel imports in March, Shimizu was able to reassure clients in the U.S. that business could continue as normal. Customers value Daido Steel's products enough to wait months for shipments to arrive and, if they could buy comparable goods domestically in the U.S., "they'd already be doing it,' he said. But his confidence vanished earlier this month when duties doubled. "At some point it stops making sense as a business,' Shimizu said. "Asking customers to pare back orders or lean on inventory or lower production could negatively impact the entire enterprise, but that risk might be unavoidable.' Daido Steel CEO Tetsuya Shimizu | Bloomberg Daido Steel earns most of its money supplying products to Japan's automakers — many of which sell cars in the U.S. that are manufactured or assembled elsewhere. Collectively, the top Japanese auto brands are bracing for a $19 billion hit from tariffs. Several Japanese carmakers have already started to shift or lower U.S. production, leaving suppliers like Daido Steel at the mercy of their customers' rapidly changing plans. In May, the steelmaker withheld full-year profit guidance for the current fiscal year and forecast a 34% drop in first-half net income. "It comes down to how carmakers respond,' said Mikine Kishi, general manager of the company's corporate planning department. "If they decide they're not going to manufacture in Japan anymore, or that they'll lower total production volumes, that would have an extremely big impact on our business.' The U.S. and China appear to have reached a detente, and Trump has signed an order that prevents multiple tariffs from piling on top of each other. But rare earths are proving to be a particular sticking point in trade negotiations. China's export controls on seven individual elements, and magnets that contain even tiny amounts of them, left sectors from auto to defense urgently trying to find workarounds. Uncertainty over supply lingers, though Beijing said this month it is accelerating the review of rare earth export license applications and has approved some requests. Daido Steel had a head start in diversifying its supply chain. Back in 2010, China briefly imposed a de facto ban on exports of rare earths to Japan following a maritime dispute, kick-starting industry efforts to break their reliance on the nation. Success has been limited though: Japan depends on China for 60% of its rare earths supply, down from 80% to 90%. As well as seeking alternative supplies, Daido Steel focused on new technology to use fewer rare earths. One of the company's key products is a neodymium magnet that doesn't include heavy rare earths, including dysprosium or terbium, which has been used by Honda since 2016. Daido Steel also supplies magnets indirectly to automakers by way of Aisin and Denso — two of Japan's biggest suppliers. Daido Steel wants to expand production and industrial use of those magnets, betting that customers will increasingly look for non-Chinese supply. It also plans to build a manufacturing plant in the U.S., though Shimizu didn't specify when or where that will happen. It would be a major disappointment if the U.S. should slide into authoritarianism, Shimizu said, because that would mean the global economy will eventually have to revolve around America. "I'm not sure there's enough time for supply chains to transition if the goal really is to produce everything in America for America,' he said.
Japan Times
21 hours ago
- Japan Times
Bombing Iran, Trump gambles on force over diplomacy
For nearly a half-century the United States has squabbled with Iran's Islamic Republic but the conflict has largely been left in the shadows, with U.S. policymakers believing, often reluctantly, that diplomacy was preferable. With President Donald Trump's order of strikes on Iran's nuclear sites, the United States — like Israel, which encouraged him — has brought the conflict into the open, and the consequences may not be clear for some time to come. "We will only know if it succeeded if we can get through the next three to five years without the Iranian regime acquiring nuclear weapons, which they now have compelling reasons to want," said Kenneth Pollack, a former CIA analyst and supporter of the 2003 Iraq war who is now vice president for policy at the Middle East Institute. U.S. intelligence had not concluded that Iran was building a nuclear bomb, with Tehran's sensitive atomic work largely seen as a means of leverage, and Iran can be presumed to have taken precautions in anticipation of strikes. Trita Parsi, an outspoken critic of military action, said Trump "has now made it more likely that Iran will be a nuclear weapons state in the next five to 10 years." "We should be careful not to confuse tactical success with strategic success," said Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. "The Iraq war was also successful in the first few weeks but President (George W.) Bush's declaration of 'Mission Accomplished' did not age well," he said. Yet Trump's attack — a week after Israel began a major military campaign — came as the cleric-run state is at one of its weakest points since the 1979 Islamic Revolution toppled the pro-Western shah. Since the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas, which enjoys Iran's support, Israel — besides obliterating much of Gaza — has decimated Lebanon's Hezbollah, a militant group that would once reliably strike Israel as Tehran's proxy. Iran's main ally among Arab leaders, Syria's Bashar Assad, was also toppled in December. Supporters of Trump's strike argued that diplomacy was not working, with Iran standing firm on its right to enrich uranium. "Contrary to what some will say in the days to come, the U.S. administration did not rush to war. In fact, it gave diplomacy a real chance," said Ted Deutch, a former Democratic congressman who now heads the American Jewish Committee. "The murderous Iranian regime refused to make a deal," he said. Top Senate Republican John Thune pointed to Tehran's threats to Israel and language against the United States and said that the state had "rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace." Trump's attack comes almost exactly a decade after former President Barack Obama sealed a deal in which Iran drastically scaled back its nuclear work — which Trump pulled out of in 2018 after coming into office for his first term. Most of Trump's Republican Party and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has long seen Iran as an existential threat, attacked Obama's deal because it allowed Tehran to enrich uranium at levels well beneath weapons grade and the key clauses had an end date. But Trump, billing himself a peacemaker, just a month ago said on a visit to Gulf Arab monarchies that he was hopeful for a new deal with Iran, and his administration was preparing new talks when Netanyahu attacked Iran. This prompted an abrupt U-turn from Trump. "Trump's decision to cut short his own efforts for diplomacy will also make it much harder to get a deal in the medium and long runs," said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, which advocates restraint. "Iran now has no incentive to trust Trump's word or to believe that striking a compromise will advance Iran's interests." Iran's religious rulers also face opposition internally. Major protests erupted in 2022 after the death in custody of Mahsa Amini, who was detained for defying the regime's rules on covering hair. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote on social media that Trump's strikes could either entrench the Islamic Republic or hasten its downfall. "The U.S. bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is an unprecedented event that may prove to be transformational for Iran, the Middle East, U.S. foreign policy, global non-proliferation and potentially even the global order," he said. "Its impact will be measured for decades to come."
Japan Times
a day ago
- Japan Times
Australia says it will base defense spending on country's needs
Australia's deputy prime minister said the nation will base defense spending on national interest, amid calls by President Donald Trump for U.S. Indo-Pacific allies to increase military budgets. Richard Marles, who serves concurrently as Australia's defense minister, will join NATO leaders for meetings in the coming week at the Hague. "There will inevitably be conversations around defense spending,' he said in a Sky News Australia interview Sunday. U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has urged Australia to increase its defense budget, part of a broader push by the Trump administration to encourage allies to raise it toward 5% of gross domestic product. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has said the nation would determine its own levels of military expenditure. "We will have a respectful conversation with the United States, of course we will do that, and of course we will determine our own defense spending based on Australia's national interest,' Marles said. When asked if Australia needs a stronger military deterrent for China, Marles said: "We are building a defense force with a very clear strategic objective, and that strategic objective is to be able to deter the coercion of any potential adversary.' The Australian government is currently aiming to increase defense spending to 2.4% of gross domestic product by the financial year ending 2034, a significant boost but below what Trump seeks from U.S. allies.
