In a major rebuke of the Trump administration, a federal judge has blocked efforts to stop Harvard University from enrolling its international students. The court found that the administration’s attempt to bar thousands of foreign students was a “blatant violation of the Constitution,” and would cause “immediate and irreparable injury” to the institution.
U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs issued a temporary restraining order Friday after Harvard filed a lawsuit earlier in the day in federal court in Boston. The university argued that the policy infringed on its First Amendment rights and would devastate over 7,000 visa holders who are part of its community.
“With the stroke of a pen, the government has sought to erase a quarter of Harvard’s student body, international students who contribute significantly to the University and its mission,” Harvard said in the lawsuit. “Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard.”
The Trump administration’s move was widely condemned as yet another ideological assault on academic institutions. In a letter to students and faculty, Harvard President Dr. Alan M. Garber described the administration’s actions as “unlawful and unwarranted,” and accused it of threatening the futures of thousands of students and scholars. “This decision imperils the futures of thousands of students and serves as a warning to countless others across the country who have come to America to pursue their education and fulfill their dreams,” Garber wrote.
Harvard also accused the administration of launching a “campaign of retribution,” as part of a broader strategy to pressure universities into aligning with the president’s ideological goals.
A spokesperson for the White House dismissed the lawsuit as “frivolous,” but critics see this as part of a deeper pattern. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem alleged that Harvard was fostering antisemitism and violence on campus, and even went so far as to accuse the university of coordinating with the Chinese Communist Party. These unsubstantiated claims have been widely criticized by civil rights advocates and education leaders.
“If only Harvard cared this much about ending the scourge of anti-American, antisemitic, pro-terrorist agitators on their campus, they wouldn’t be in this situation,” said Abigail Jackson, in a statement to The New York Times. But Harvard officials maintain that the university’s commitment to free inquiry and international collaboration is non-negotiable.
The decision by Judge Burroughs came just days after another federal judge in California blocked the administration from revoking the legal status of international students nationwide. That ruling, issued by District Judge Jeffrey White, prevents the government from arresting or jailing students over visa status while legal challenges continue.
Together, the rulings represent a significant legal and moral victory for higher education and immigrant students, and a public defeat for an administration that has repeatedly attempted to use immigration policy as a political weapon. With international students making up over 25 percent of Harvard’s population, the stakes could not have been higher.
For now, the court’s decision has protected thousands of lives and academic careers. But the case also signals that the battle over immigration, education, and constitutional rights is far from over. As universities across the country brace for future legal and political challenges, Harvard’s stance is likely to set a precedent for how American institutions respond to government overreach in the years ahead.
