On Wednesday, the Trump administration unveiled a proposed rule that would significantly alter the visa program for foreign students in the United States. The new rule, set to be published on Thursday, would limit the length of stay for international students to a maximum of four years regardless of their enrollment status. This change is part of a broader effort by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to tackle visa abuse, enhance oversight, and reduce the financial and safety risks posed by long-term visa holders.
According to the DHS press release, the proposal aims to end the practice of ‘forever students’ who have remained in the U.S. indefinitely by enrolling in extended programs. The policy would replace the current system, which allows students to stay as long as they are enrolled as full-time students, with a strict four-year cap. This is typically less than the time needed to complete an advanced degree, which could have a significant impact on U.S. colleges and universities that rely heavily on international student tuition fees.
The proposed rule is part of a larger initiative to tighten visa regulations and increase the ability of the DHS to properly vet and oversee visa holders. This includes extending the initial entry period for foreign journalists to up to 240 days with an optional extension of another 240 days. However, the rule would not allow them to stay beyond the length of their assignment. These measures are intended to reduce the number of individuals in the U.S. on visas and ensure that the federal government maintains proper oversight of foreign nationals.
The proposal has drawn criticism from education leaders who warn that it could harm the U.S. economy, innovation, and global competitiveness by deterring international students from choosing the U.S. as their place of study. Fanta Aw, the executive director and CEO of NAFSA: Association of International Educators, stated that the rule would act as an additional deterrent to international students selecting the U.S. for their education. The financial implications of the rule could be substantial, particularly for higher education institutions that depend on international student tuition to subsidize their programs.
While the administration claims the policy is necessary to prevent abuse and protect national interests, critics argue that the move could have a negative impact on both the U.S. economy and its global reputation as a hub for international education. The proposal also highlights the ongoing debate over immigration policy and the balance between national security and economic opportunities. The final ruling on the proposal is expected to be announced soon, and the impact on international students and U.S. higher education institutions remains uncertain.