In a controversial move that has sparked both legal backlash and international condemnation, the Trump administration has officially revoked Harvard University’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification, preventing the university from enrolling new international students. The decision, reportedly grounded in concerns over “pro-terrorist conduct” and national security, directly affects Harvard’s ability to host thousands of foreign students under the student visa framework.
The revocation means that Harvard international students—currently numbering over 6,800—face uncertainty regarding their immigration status, future education, and research continuity. This decision marks a new low in relations between the Trump administration and elite academic institutions, and could redefine U.S. higher education's global reputation.
According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Harvard allegedly failed to comply with federal data-sharing requests regarding the activities of foreign students, some of whom had participated in campus protests. The administration further accused Harvard of fostering an environment tolerant of speech and activism the White House deems sympathetic to terrorist ideologies.
The decision follows broader federal scrutiny of academic discourse in the U.S., where speaking out in defense of Palestinians or against Israel has become increasingly fraught. In a recent development, Microsoft was accused of blocking internal communications containing terms such as "Palestine," "Gaza," "genocide," and "apartheid," suggesting a chilling effect on free speech even in corporate and academic environments.
Harvard University responded strongly, denying all allegations and emphasizing its dedication to academic freedom, privacy, and legal compliance. "We will not surrender our independence nor compromise the values that define this institution," a Harvard spokesperson stated, while also confirming that the university has launched legal proceedings to challenge the SEVP revocation and the freezing of federal research funds.
Critics argue that this revocation could set a dangerous precedent, where federal immigration tools are used to pressure institutions into ideological conformity. International stakeholders, particularly in China and India—two of the largest sources of Harvard’s international student population—have expressed deep concern, warning that such politicization may deter global academic collaboration.
Legal experts suggest the administration's framing of “pro-terrorist conduct” lacks transparency and could violate due process norms. Meanwhile, students and faculty nationwide have expressed fears that Harvard University's SEVP decertification is part of a larger campaign to suppress dissent and reframe academic spaces under political agendas.
As the legal battle unfolds, the future of Harvard’s international students remains in limbo—caught in the crossfire of immigration policy and ideological disputes.