SEVIS nightmare: International students blindsided by visa cancellations

Why are international students taking legal action against the Trump administration?

A growing number of international students across the United States have launched lawsuits against the Trump administration, accusing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) of unlawfully revoking their legal status. The students argue that their student visas were terminated without notice, justification, or due process, placing them at immediate risk of deportation and disrupting their academic lives and long-term career prospects. At the centre of the controversy is the use of the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), a federal database designed to track foreign students and their compliance with U.S. immigration regulations.

Plaintiffs, including students from countries such as India, China, and Nepal, contend that they were removed from SEVIS arbitrarily, despite maintaining their full-time student status and academic performance. Among those affected is Chinmay Deore, a graduate student at Wayne State University, who is challenging the revocation of his visa on the grounds that it was terminated without warning, despite his university confirming that he had not violated immigration laws. The legal actions underscore a broader pattern of what students and legal advocates are calling politically motivated and discriminatory enforcement.

What is the legal basis of the lawsuits over SEVIS visa terminations?

The lawsuits allege violations of constitutional rights, including due process protections guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and private immigration attorneys representing the students have criticised the DHS for failing to provide reasons or allow appeals before terminating visa status. Legal filings claim that students were never formally notified about specific infractions and were instead removed from the SEVIS database with no opportunity to defend themselves.

Experts in immigration law have raised concerns about the opacity of SEVIS operations and the implications of using an administrative tool to conduct mass visa revocations without judicial oversight. The U.S. government has long maintained that it has the authority to monitor and enforce compliance for non-citizen students, but critics argue that recent actions reflect a shift from regulatory enforcement to political targeting—especially given the scale and speed of the terminations.

Under the Trump administration, visa policies have been increasingly characterised by rapid rule changes, heightened scrutiny, and increased enforcement aimed at reducing legal immigration channels. The Department of Homeland Security has previously used SEVIS data in high-profile sting operations against institutions such as the fake “University of Farmington,” which enrolled students under false pretences to expose visa fraud. However, in these recent terminations, no fraud allegations have been made against either students or the universities involved.

How are universities and academic institutions responding to the legal challenges?

Universities caught in the middle of the controversy have expressed concern over the lack of transparency from federal authorities and the disruption caused to affected students. Institutions such as the University of Michigan and Wayne State University have supported efforts to restore student status for those impacted, while also calling on the DHS to clarify the basis for visa cancellations.

Several academic administrators have argued that these revocations damage the United States’ standing as a global destination for education and innovation. The National Association of Foreign Student Advisers (NAFSA) has echoed these concerns, warning that the perception of political hostility could reduce international enrolments, which are already declining due to post-pandemic uncertainties and growing competition from countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

Universities have also reported that SEVIS records were altered without consultation or warning, making it difficult for them to intervene on behalf of students. In many cases, the terminations occurred after the students had already been enrolled for multiple semesters, and in some instances, they were preparing to graduate.

How does this fit into broader Trump-era immigration and student visa policy?

The Trump administration’s stance on immigration has consistently emphasised restrictionism, with particular focus on reducing work-based and study-based visa categories. In 2020, the administration proposed a controversial rule that would have imposed fixed four-year terms on international student visas, eliminating the long-standing “duration of status” model that allowed students to remain in the U.S. as long as they maintained active academic status. Although that proposal was ultimately withdrawn following public backlash, it reflected a broader intent to tighten control over non-immigrant visa programmes.

These recent SEVIS terminations appear to follow the same ideological thread. Legal analysts suggest that the administration may be leveraging administrative data tools to execute immigration enforcement actions that would otherwise require judicial processes. This tactic aligns with other Trump-era immigration policies that emphasised executive discretion over procedural safeguards, particularly in areas such as asylum, refugee admissions, and work authorisation.

Some of the visa terminations also overlap with recent political flashpoints, including heightened surveillance of foreign nationals involved in campus protests and an increased focus on students from countries deemed to pose “espionage risks,” including China and Iran. While federal agencies deny that these actions target any group based on national origin or political beliefs, civil rights advocates remain sceptical.

What impact could these lawsuits have on U.S. immigration and education policy?

If successful, the lawsuits could force the DHS to reinstate the affected students’ SEVIS records, allowing them to remain in the U.S. and complete their studies. More significantly, a legal victory could compel a review of how the government uses administrative databases to take adverse immigration actions without judicial oversight. It may also lead to the establishment of new procedural protections for international students, ensuring that any visa termination must be preceded by formal notice, clear justification, and an opportunity to respond.

In the broader context of U.S. education policy, the controversy has re-energised calls for legislative reform to protect the rights of international students and clarify the role of academic institutions in immigration enforcement. While the Biden administration has rolled back several Trump-era immigration restrictions, these SEVIS terminations occurred during the transition period, with some terminations only being discovered months later.

Advocacy organisations estimate that more than 1,300 international students may have been affected by the abrupt terminations. As litigation proceeds, interim court orders have already restored the status of some plaintiffs, while others remain in limbo, unsure whether they will be permitted to complete their degrees or must prepare for removal proceedings.

How are students coping with the uncertainty and legal limbo?

The emotional and financial toll on international students has been considerable. Many have invested years of study, thousands of dollars in tuition, and their families’ savings into pursuing education in the United States. With their legal status in doubt, these students have had to pause their academic work, postpone job opportunities, and in some cases, leave the country entirely.

In interviews and court affidavits, students describe feelings of anxiety, betrayal, and helplessness. Some have reported that visa terminations were triggered by data errors or delays in updating SEVIS records during course registration changes—administrative issues that had historically been resolved through advisor intervention but now result in visa loss without recourse.

The uncertainty surrounding their status has made them wary of further engagement with U.S. institutions, with many reconsidering plans to apply for Optional Practical Training (OPT) or transition to work visas. Immigration attorneys argue that unless these cases are resolved fairly and transparently, they could have a chilling effect on future international enrolments, undermining decades of U.S. higher education diplomacy.

What are the next steps in the legal and policy landscape?

As legal proceedings continue in district courts across the country, judges will weigh whether the DHS acted within its authority when it terminated SEVIS records without notifying affected individuals. A central legal question is whether these administrative removals constitute “constructive deportation,” which would normally require a hearing before an immigration judge. Should courts find that due process was violated, it could set a precedent affecting other immigration systems relying on automated or opaque decision-making.

At the same time, calls are growing for Congress and the Department of Education to work with the DHS in developing clearer policies governing student visa oversight. Stakeholders argue that protecting the rights of international students is essential to preserving the integrity and global reputation of American higher education.

The unfolding legal battles represent a critical test of how far executive power can reach in enforcing immigration rules without checks and balances. For now, the students at the centre of the lawsuits remain in limbo—determined to pursue justice while navigating a system that, in their view, turned against them without warning.