Reporter’s Notebook: At a Beseiged Harvard, International Students Grapple With Uncertainty

On a rainy Memorial Day weekend, Harvard University was bustling with preparations for its upcoming graduation, while the campus community grappled with recent U.S. government actions that could profoundly affect international students. A young male Harvard graduate, personally affected, voiced disbelief at the Trump administration's sudden move to bar the university from enrolling international students. For him, this seizure was the most shocking action of the administration to date, directly impacting his sense of belonging and future prospects at Harvard [para. 1].

The atmosphere in Boston, the heart of American academia, was charged with anticipation and unease. Harvard, along with peer institutions such as MIT, was moving forward with graduation events, with workers meticulously setting up chairs in front of the iconic Widener Library for the ceremony. The festive arrangements stood in stark contrast to the uncertainty surrounding international student admissions [para. 2].

His girlfriend, referencing renowned Harvard political philosopher Michael Sandel, argued that the university has a primary responsibility to Americans, especially marginalized groups like Native Americans, and could justifiably prioritize them over international students. According to Sandel, such quotas might foster a more inclusive U.S. society. The couple agreed that studying in America is indeed a privilege, yet the young man insisted that international students who have secured U.S. visas after rigorous screening should not face new obstacles once admitted [para. 3][para. 4][para. 5][para. 6].

Around campus, students celebrated in their caps and gowns, taking graduation photos despite the weather. Still, the cheerful display could not ease the growing concerns among many about their future status in the United States [para. 7].

Harvard’s elite standing has placed it at the center of President Trump’s renewed pledge, during his 2024 campaign, to “take back control” of U.S. colleges. Many “Make America Great Again” supporters view Ivy League schools as bastions of liberalism and establishment power, making them key targets in a broader ideological conflict [para. 8]. Since Trump’s return to office, the White House has clashed with Harvard over issues such as admissions policies and curriculum. The administration has threatened measures like freezing federal funding and revoking student visas, demanding compliance with investigations, especially regarding anti-Semitic protests related to the Gaza conflict [para. 9].

Universities such as Harvard and Columbia see these actions as unlawful assaults on academic independence and detrimental to America’s global competitiveness. Critics argue that the administration aims to reshape higher education along “America First” lines [para. 10].

Tensions reached a peak on May 22, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) suspended Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification due to alleged non-cooperation in investigations. The loss of SEVP status immediately threatened Harvard’s ability to admit foreign students, leaving existing students to either transfer or face the risk of losing legal student status [para. 11][para. 12]. International students make up about 25% of Harvard’s enrollment, and approximately 6% of all U.S. higher education students are from abroad, contributing roughly $50 billion yearly to the U.S. economy. Notably, India has overtaken China as the top source, with Chinese student numbers dropping from a peak of 370,000 in 2019 to 277,000 in 2024 [para. 13].

Harvard quickly filed suit against federal departments, arguing the move violated free speech and due process. Within a day, a federal judge blocked the DHS directive, citing potential “immediate and irreparable harm” to roughly 7,000 Harvard international students. Yet, legal uncertainties remain [para. 14][para. 15].

Students and scholars expressed heightened anxieties, fearing reprisals for criticizing the government, with some considering leaving the U.S. altogether. Others saw these policies as a harbinger of anti-immigrant sentiment that could spread internationally [para. 16][para. 17][para. 18][para. 19][para. 20][para. 21]. A Harvard Law graduate believed the outcome might rest on legal procedural issues, rather than the broader policy itself, leaving a shadow of uncertainty over the future for international students [para. 22][para. 23].