Trump's Mass Cancellation of Student Visas Illustrates the Lawlessness of His Immigration Crackdown
A federal judge blocks the administration's "Student Criminal Alien Initiative," which targeted foreign students who had no criminal records.
Last month, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) suddenly terminated about 4,700 records in the database of foreign students with F-1 visas authorizing them to attend American universities. That move, which sowed panic among students across the country, was the result of the Trump administration's "Student Criminal Alien Initiative." But contrary to the implication of that label, the initiative affected many people who had no criminal record that would justify revoking their visas. Nor did ICE cite any other specific justification listed in the relevant regulations. Instead, the students were told their records had been terminated for "otherwise failing to maintain status."
Although ICE subsequently restored those records in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), they still included notations of the prior terminations. Those black marks, along with the possibility that ICE might reverse course again at any time, left thousands of students uncertain about whether they would be allowed to remain in the United States and complete their degrees. On Thursday, a federal judge in California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction that aims to rectify that situation, and his reasoning highlights the alarming legal shortcuts that characterize President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown.
The SEVIS controversy may seem arcane. But it illustrates several disturbing themes of Trump's deportation crusade, including his indiscriminate approach, disregard for due process, blatant flouting of statutory and constitutional requirements, shifting legal positions, and determination to avoid judicial review.
The SEVIS terminations "reflect an instinct that has become prevalent in our society to effectuate change: move fast and break things," writes U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White, a George W. Bush appointee who is considering several lawsuits by foreign students in the Northern District of California. "That instinct must be checked when it conflicts with established principles of law."
White's preliminary injunction bars the government from "arresting and incarcerating any of the named Plaintiffs in these cases and similarly situated individuals nationwide pending resolution of these proceedings." The injunction also says the government may not transfer any of those individuals "outside the jurisdiction of their residence," impose "any adverse legal effect" based on the SEVIS terminations, or "revers[e] the reinstatement" of the records.
Explaining the rationale for a nationwide injunction, White says the plaintiffs "have met their burden to show a likelihood of irreparable harm." He "sees no rational distinction between the harms inflicted on the [named plaintiffs] and the harms inflicted on similarly situated individuals across the United States." He notes that "these cases and the litigation around the United States" stem from "a uniform policy that uniformly wreaked havoc not only on the lives of Plaintiffs here but on similarly situated F-1 nonimmigrants across the United States and continues do so."
The plaintiffs in the California lawsuits "allege Defendants violated the Due Process clause of the United States Constitution," White notes before alluding to the various ways in which the Trump administration, in its eagerness to summarily expel as many foreigners as possible, has disregarded due process. "Lest any Defendant be unsure," he archly adds, "that clause 'applies to all 'persons' within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence here is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent.'"
White is quoting the Supreme Court's 2001 ruling in Zadvydas v. Davis, and he notes that the justices unanimously reaffirmed that principle last month in Trump v. J.G.G., which involved the president's attempt to deport suspected members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua under the Alien Enemies Act. "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in the context of removal proceedings," the Court noted in holding that alleged gang members had a right to contest their designation as "alien enemies" prior to deportation.
The plaintiffs in the California cases also argue that the Student Criminal Alien Initiative violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which authorizes federal courts to "set aside" any agency action that is "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." White notes that "the overwhelming majority of courts" considering lawsuits by students whose SEVIS records were terminated "have determined the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of the same claims presented here." It is not hard to see why.
To implement the administration's initiative, ICE checked about 1.3 million student visa holders against a database maintained by the National Criminal Information Center (NCIC), which includes law enforcement contacts that did not necessarily result in charges, let alone convictions. ICE "forwarded lists of the individuals with positive results to the State Department for its consideration," White notes. "After the State Department received these lists, it took approximately fifteen minutes to decide that all records in SEVIS relating to those names should be terminated."
As White notes, the lists included students who "had some contact with law enforcement" but did not have "a conviction that would cause them to fail to maintain status" under 8 CFR 214.1(g), which disqualifies people who commit "a crime of violence for which a sentence of more than one year imprisonment may be imposed." He mentions several plaintiffs in these cases who had no criminal record at all.
According to testimony by Andre Watson, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official, "the only individualized assessment made was whether an individual identified who had a positive result in the NCIC database was an individual listed within the SEVIS database," White writes. He says the plaintiffs therefore "are likely to prevail on their claim that the decision to terminate their SEVIS records was arbitrary and capricious because the decision was not based on a 'rational connection between the facts found and the choice made.'"
Another regulation, 8 CFR 214.1(d), lists three additional circumstances in which "the nonimmigrant status of an alien shall be terminated," none of which applies here. "Because the record also shows that Defendants did not rely on one of the three circumstances set forth" in that provision, White says, "the Court also concludes Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that Defendants' actions are contrary to law."
The government asserted, contrary to what the plaintiffs claimed, that terminating the SEVIS records was not tantamount to revoking the corresponding student visas. "Defendants have argued that the termination was merely a 'red flag' and that terminating a SEVIS record has no impact on immigration status," White notes. He "joins the growing number of courts around the United States [that] have rejected this position."
DHS "advises the public that when a SEVIS record is terminated for failing to maintain status" the visa holder "loses all on- and/or off-campus employment authorization" and "cannot re-enter the United States" after traveling abroad, White notes. The department says a termination also cancels visas for the student's dependents. It adds that ICE agents "may investigate to confirm the departure of the student." By the government's own account, in other words, a student whose SEVIS record is terminated loses the privileges associated with his visa, including permission to remain in the United States.
That understanding, White says, is confirmed by an April 2025 "notice of intent to deny" a student's application for an H-1B "temporary worker" visa. According to "the beneficiary's SEVIS record," U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said in that notice, "their F-1 nonimmigrant status was terminated on April 10, 2025 because of the criminal records check and the revocation of their F-1 visa." White adds that "the State Department describes a SEVIS record as 'the definitive record of student or exchange visitor status and visa eligibility.'" In short, he says, there is "ample evidence that 'DHS officials and agencies…construe a student's SEVIS record as the equivalent of his actual F-1 student status."
The government also argued that ICE had eliminated any harm caused by its SEVIS terminations when it restored those records. But while the defendants "have reactivated Plaintiffs' SEVIS records retroactively," White notes, "they claim it is technologically impossible to both remove the fact of termination from those records and to issue public-facing statements within SEVIS about the effect of the reactivation." And although the government says it is "sending letters to every F-1 nonimmigrant whose SEVIS record was terminated to address those concerns and to provide them with supporting documentation," he adds, "the letter contains no representations that it will be binding on Defendants," and "the erroneous notations remain in Plaintiffs' records."
For those reasons, White says, the plaintiffs "have shown they have and will continue to suffer significant hardship because of Defendants' actions. Unlike the letter Defendants intend to send, the relief the Court grants provides Plaintiffs with a measure of stability and certainty that they will be able to continue their studies or their employment without the threat of re-termination hanging over their heads."
White notes that the government "abruptly reversed course" at an April 25 hearing in these cases, saying "ICE had begun to reinstate SEVIS records and would develop a new policy for terminating SEVIS records going forward." The next day, the government's lawyers told White that ICE "has issued a new policy concerning the termination of records." The new policy, White notes, included two reasons for termination that "are not included on DHS's website": "Evidence of a Failure to Comply with the Terms of Nonimmigrant Status Exists" and "U.S. Department of State Visa Revocation."
At a May 14 hearing, White says, the government "advised the Court of yet another new development." It said that "ICE is restoring SEVIS records retroactively to the date the records were terminated" and that the government would send explanatory letters to all of the affected students.
Those shifts "since these cases were filed" suggest the Trump administration "may be trying to place any future SEVIS terminations beyond judicial review," White writes. "At each turn in this and similar litigation across the nation, Defendants have abruptly changed course to satisfy courts' expressed concerns. It is unclear how this game of whack-a-mole will end unless Defendants are enjoined from skirting their own mandatory regulations."
