Trump's Harvard Student Ban KO'd at the Last Second!

Harvard Wins Again: Judge Blocks Trump's International Student Entry Ban

In a significant victory for Harvard University and international students, a federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction halting President Donald Trump’s June 4 proclamation that sought to ban travelers from entering the United States on Harvard-sponsored F and J visas. The ruling, delivered by U.S. District Judge Allison D. Burroughs, provides a crucial reprieve for the university as it continues to fight the Trump administration's policies targeting its international student community.

The injunction arrived just hours before a previous temporary block on the proclamation was set to expire, signaling that Judge Burroughs is likely to rule in Harvard’s favor in the ongoing lawsuit. This is Harvard's second major legal victory against the White House in a week. Last Friday, Burroughs issued another preliminary injunction, blocking the federal government’s May 22 revocation of Harvard’s authorization to enroll foreign students.

A Scathing Indictment of Trump Administration's Motives

In a compelling 44-page memorandum, Judge Burroughs didn't mince words. She stated that the Trump administration's attempts to justify the proclamation on national security grounds were a mere disguise for retaliation against Harvard.
"The Proclamation quite obviously has no ‘legitimate grounding’ in its stated concerns, and it is ‘inexplicable by anything but animus,’" Burroughs wrote, underscoring the perceived lack of legitimate justification and hinting at malicious intent.

The Backstory: A Battle of Wills

The legal clash between Harvard and the White House began in early April after the university publicly rejected far-reaching demands from the Trump administration. These demands included:

• Screening international applicants for their political beliefs.
• Hiring new faculty to enforce "viewpoint diversity."
• Derecognizing a list of pro-Palestine student groups.
• Implementing a host of other internal changes.

Following Harvard's refusal, the Trump administration responded swiftly, cutting over $2 billion in federal funding. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) further threatened to revoke Harvard's authorization to host international students unless the university provided dossiers on their disciplinary histories and participation in protests. The DHS followed through with its threat on May 22, prompting Harvard to launch its second lawsuit.

Turning the Tide: Using Trump's Words Against Him

Throughout this conflict, Trump and other government officials consistently denounced Harvard through social media posts, press releases, and media appearances. However, Judge Burroughs skillfully used their own words against them.

She cited messages suggesting that Harvard was:

• Teaching students "radical ideology."
• Hiring "Leftist dopes."
• Bringing punishment upon itself by defying Trump's demands.

Burroughs argued that these messages served as evidence that the administration engaged in viewpoint discrimination against Harvard for its perceived political leanings and retaliated against the university for rejecting the federal government’s demands.

The Stakes: International Students in Limbo

The rapidly shifting federal guidance had left some students and scholars in a state of uncertainty, with visa paperwork in administrative limbo and some even being detained and turned away at airports. This injunction provides a measure of stability for them.

International students constitute approximately a quarter of Harvard’s student body. Harvard had argued that the entry ban would severely impact its incoming classes and research labs that depend on international researchers. Judge Burroughs concurred that Harvard was likely to suffer immediate and irreparable harm if she did not pause Trump’s proclamation.

The Broader Implications

Judge Burroughs framed the case in profound terms, stating:
"At its root, this case is about core constitutional rights that must be safeguarded: freedom of thought, freedom of expression, and freedom of speech, each of which is a pillar of a functioning democracy and an essential hedge against authoritarianism," Burroughs wrote.
"As George Washington said, if freedom of speech is taken away, then ‘dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the Slaughter.’"

Reactions and Next Steps

While Trump claimed Harvard had been cooperative in negotiations, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem has continued to threaten revocation of Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification. Harvard, however, celebrated the ruling. A University spokesperson stated that Burroughs’ order “will continue to allow Harvard to host international students and scholars while this case moves forward," adding, "Harvard will continue to defend its rights — and the rights of its students and scholars."

This legal battle underscores the ongoing tension between academic institutions and political agendas, highlighting the importance of protecting intellectual freedom and the rights of international students. Judge Burroughs' ruling serves as a powerful reminder of the judiciary's role in safeguarding core constitutional principles.

Source: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025/6/24/preliminary-injunction-trump-proclamation/