Last updated: November 5, 2026
Latest Activity
On November 3, the government filed a motion with the appeals court requesting that the court not consider the appeal for thirty days. This will enable the district court to move forward with its final judgement on the merits of the case.
A final decision on the lawsuit in the district court is imminent. Pausing the appeal at this time saves the court and both parties time and money.
Summary of Key Events
- A lawsuit and a motion for a preliminary injunction was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on August 18 in response to the government’s final rule to end Duration of Status for F-1 and J-1 students.
- On September 14, the judge granted the plaintiffs’ request for nationwide preliminary relief. This act blocks the rule from taking effect and prohibits DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from implementing it while the case continues.
- On September 30, the government filed an appeal of the preliminary relief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The rule remains blocked nationwide while the underlying litigation continues.
- On November 3, the government filed a motion with the appeals court requesting that the court not consider the appeal for thirty days. This will enable the district court to move forward with its final judgement on the merits of the case.
- A final decision on the lawsuit in the district court is imminent. Pausing the appeal at this time saves the court and both parties time and money.
Litigation Filed in the United States District Court to Stop D/S Rule Implementation
On August 18, NAFSA: Association of International Educators and the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration led a coalition (see below for full list of plaintiffs) of associations and unions in filing a complaint and a motion for preliminary injunction in response the administration’s final rule ending Duration of Status (D/S) for international students in F-1 and J-1 status.
As conveyed in a joint press release, the complaint argues that the final rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act because the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) failed to adequately assess its costs and benefits, meaningfully respond to public comments, consider less burdensome alternatives, or justify the rule based on its stated objectives. It also alleges that DHS provided an inadequate public comment period and exceeded its statutory authority.
District Court Process
The judge assigned to the case, District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV, set a deadline of August 31, 2026 for the defendants to respond to the motion. The motion hearing was set for September 3 at 11:00 am ET in the Moakley United States Courthouse, home to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The defendant, the Department of Homeland Security, requested a four-day extension to respond to the motion. The court granted an extension until September 2. The defendant submitted its response on September 2.
District Court Hearing
The preliminary injunction hearing was held as planned on September 3. The legal counsel arguing for the preliminary injunction was outstanding and the judge asked very pertinent questions of both parties. Stories by the Boston Globe, the News Guild (a coplaintiff), and the Harvard Crimson provide more context. Read the joint statement from NAFSA and other plaintiffs for more information. The transcript of the full hearing is now available.
Preliminary Injunction Granted
On September 14, U.S. District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted nationwide preliminary relief. This act blocks the rule from taking effect and prohibits DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement from implementing it while the case continues. As a result, the longstanding Duration of Status framework remains in place nationwide. Read the joint press statement from the plaintiffs for reactions.
The judge has demonstrated a desire to move quickly on next steps. He required the government to provide the court with the documents, data, and evidence DHS used to prepare the final rule by October 23. Additional briefing materials and responses to those materials were submitted to the court by October 30 and November 2.
Government Appeals Preliminary Relief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
On September 30, the federal government filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The appeal does not put the D/S final rule into effect nor does it change the district court’s order postponing the rule’s effective date. The rule remains blocked nationwide while the litigation continues. At an October 2 status conference, the government said it plans to ask the appeals court to expedite the appeal and also indicated that it wants to pause proceedings in the district court.
Appeals Process
The plaintiffs asked the district court to move toward a prompt final judgment, which would allow the government’s challenge of the preliminary relief and their expected appeal of a court decision in favor of the plaintiffs to proceed together in the appeals court. The district court judge directed both sides to file their positions on the next steps and related procedural questions by October 9.
The appeals court required the government to submit its brief by November 9. The plaintiffs’ brief will be due on December 9. The government has until December 19 to respond.
However, on November 3, the government filed a motion with the appeals court requesting that the court not consider the appeal for thirty days and suspend the briefing schedule. The goal is to enable the district court to move forward with its final judgement on the merits of the case to make it possible to consolidate the appeal of the preliminary relief and the final judgement into one case to go before the appeals court.
Full List of Plaintiffs
The plaintiffs are: NAFSA: Association of International Educators; the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration; the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts (AICUM); the American Federation of Teachers (AFT); Graduate Labor Organization, AFT Local 6516 (GLO); International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW); United Auto Workers Local 2322; and The NewsGuild-CWA. The plaintiffs are represented by McDermott Will & Schulte. The litigators leading this effort are Paul Hughes and Andrew Lyonsberg.
About the Final Rule
The final rule ending D/S would replace the current flexible system with a system that admits students for a fixed period of time: only until the program end date on their SEVIS document, but not to exceed four years. It requires international students and exchange visitors to apply for extensions of stay. It also restricts students’ ability to change educational objectives, transfer institutions, or pursue additional programs of study. These changes create uncertainty for students, additional burdens for institutions, and serious ripple effects for programs such as Optional Practical Training (OPT) and H-1B that connect education to the U.S. workforce.
Ending D/S poses an immediate threat to international students and scholars, U.S. higher education institutions, and the nation’s economy and global competitiveness. This litigation seeks to preserve the framework that has long supported international student success, institutional stability, and U.S. leadership in education, research, and innovation.
Resources
- Several states joined in filing an amicus brief in support of the preliminary injuction motion and lawsuit against the end of Duration of Status. Their brief elaborates upon the broad range of imminent harms these states would face in the absence of the relief sought by the plaintiffs.
- NAFSA has created a Duration of Status Rule Portal that contains a detailed analysis of the final rule, recordings of webinars dedicated to its ramifications, and an explainer to share with stakeholders.