The rule ending Duration of Status for F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors is scheduled to take effect on September 15, 2026.

It is now being challenged in federal court.

On August 18, a coalition of higher education organizations and labor unions filed a lawsuit asking a judge to vacate the rule before it ever goes into effect. If you are an international student, a scholar, or an employer who works with them, here is what you need to know.

Who Filed the Lawsuit

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts as Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration et al. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al.

The plaintiffs include:

  • The Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, which represents close to 600 public and private colleges and universities
  • NAFSA: Association of International Educators
  • The American Federation of Teachers
  • The United Auto Workers, which represents graduate student workers at a number of universities
  • Several organizations representing the journalism sector

Eight organizations in total signed on.

What the Lawsuit Argues

The core claim is that the Department of Homeland Security violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the federal law that governs how agencies create rules.

The specific allegations:

  • The comment period was inadequate. Plaintiffs say DHS did not give the public enough time to respond to a rule of this scope.
  • DHS failed to meaningfully consider public comments. The rule drew what the lawsuit describes as near-universal opposition, and plaintiffs argue that opposition was largely brushed aside.
  • The cost-benefit analysis was insufficient. DHS did not adequately weigh what the rule would actually cost students, universities, and the broader economy.
  • The rule is arbitrary and capricious. Plaintiffs contend DHS leaned on thin anecdotal evidence to justify a sweeping change.

This framework may sounds familiar. It’s the same legal theory presented earlier this year when a federal court struck down the $100,000 H-1B fee, and it was central to the rulings on the visa processing freeze.

What the Rule Actually Does

A quick refresher on what is at stake.

Under the current system, F-1 and J-1 visa holders are admitted for duration of status, meaning they can remain as long as they are making adequate progress in their program. No fixed end date.

Under the new rule:

  • F and J nonimmigrants would be admitted for the length of their program, up to four years at a time
  • Anyone needing more time would have to file a formal extension with USCIS, pay a fee, and complete biometrics
  • Foreign journalists in I status would be limited to 240 days, with a 90-day limit for certain PRC passport holders
  • The F-1 grace period after program completion drops from 60 days to 30

One clarification worth making, because it gets misreported: the rule does not require students to finish their degree in four years. Students in longer programs can apply to extend. The concern is the burden, cost, delay, and denial risk that the extension process introduces.

Why Universities Say This Matters

The plaintiffs describe the potential impact as catastrophic, and the numbers behind that language are substantial.

International students contribute roughly $43 billion to the U.S. economy annually.

The programs most affected are the longest ones. Doctoral programs routinely run past four years. So do medical training pathways and many research appointments. Those are precisely the fields where the U.S. has historically relied on international talent.

The lawsuit also argues the rule will deter enrollment before it ever affects anyone directly. Students weighing where to study may simply choose a country where their status is not at risk partway through a dissertation.

What Happens Next

The plaintiffs are asking the court to vacate the rule before September 15. That means the timeline is compressed and a ruling could come quickly.

There are three realistic outcomes:

  1. The court blocks the rule before it takes effect, and duration of status continues while litigation proceeds
  2. The court declines to block it, and the rule takes effect on schedule while the case moves forward
  3. A partial ruling narrows some provisions while leaving others in place

What You Should Do in the Meantime

Plan as though the rule takes effect on September 15. A pending lawsuit is not a stay. Nothing has been paused.

Practical steps:

  • Know your current I-94 expiration and program end date
  • If you are considering international travel this fall, talk to your DSO or an attorney first, since reentry after September 15 can move you into the new system
  • If you are in a program likely to run past four years, start the extension conversation early
  • Employers and institutions should continue preparing tracking systems rather than waiting on the court

If the rule is blocked, you will have lost nothing by preparing. If it is not, you will be ready.

We Are Here to Help

At Garvish Immigration Law Group, we are following this litigation closely and watching for any ruling before September 15. If you have questions about how the rule or the lawsuit affects your situation, we are here to help you plan.

Reach out to us today.