Raquel Badillo GS, a Ph.D. student in economics from Mexico, frequently travels between the United States and Mexico to conduct research for her degree. But now, she worries a new federal rule capping F-1 and J-1 visa durations could prevent her from continuing her work.
The rule — the final version of which was announced by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in July and is set to go into effect Sept. 15 — sets a maximum of four years for international students to remain in the country to complete their programs. Previously, students were granted legal status in the country for the duration of their studies, as long as they were making progress toward completing their academic or research goals.
Visa holders looking to extend their degree or start a new program must go through the process of obtaining a formal extension to their Form I-20, a government-issued document certifying enrollment in a program of study.
The rule is set to take effect on Sept. 15. Students who were admitted prior to the new rule going into effect — and who are in the United States on Sept. 15 — will be able to stay until their program ends, permitted that end date is no later than Nov. 14, 2030.
But if they leave the country and try to return — to visit their families or conduct their research — the new policy will kick in and they will be admitted for only a fixed time period.
When Badillo first heard of the policy, she was immediately concerned about how the rule could impact her ability to complete her research.
Badillo wrote in an email to The Herald that because many graduate programs are designed to take more than four years, “limiting students to four years does not reflect the actual structure or timeline of many doctoral programs.”
“Policies affecting our ability to remain in the country or travel internationally therefore have serious consequences for our research, professional development and well-being,” she added.
The Trump administration has taken a number of actions targeted at international students on visas, such as revoking student visas and pausing interviews for student visa applications. Last spring, international students shared with The Herald that many worry about sharing their opinions on campus for fear of repercussions to their visa status.
The Herald spoke to several international students about their concerns about the new rule’s repercussions, should it go into effect as planned.
“It’s scary,” Adam Kubisiak ’29, a student from Bolivia, said regarding the new policy. “It’s much harder to apply for an extension” beyond the fixed time period.
Because Kubisiak arrived at Brown prior to Sept. 15, the rule would not immediately jeopardize his visa status. But should he go home, his visa would be capped at the policy’s new four-year limit once he reentered the United States.
Kubisiak pointed out that if a student wants to graduate a semester later, or is forced to do so because they want to change their concentration or they are failing a class, they’ll face obstacles with the strict four-year cutoff.
While he currently does not plan to pursue any further education in the United States after he graduates from Brown, the new rule still limits his options. “That’s never a good thing,” he said.
Kubisiask also worries that the new policy precedes further restrictions on international students in the United States.
Stella Oyekanmi GS, a third-year Ph.D. student in anthropology from Nigeria, said she thinks the new rule will most affect students just coming to the United States.
Students who wish to remain in the United States for more than four years can apply for an extension to their visa status, but Oyekanmi feels “there’s even some form of anxiety in that,” because “you’re not even sure if at the end of the day if your application is going to be approved.”
Shidas Kalappadan GS, a master’s student in physics from India said that the uncertainty of the process may not only deter future applicants, but may also impact the quality of current students’ research and work.
Kalappadan said that several of her friends had been planning on pursuing Ph.D. studies in the United States but are now rethinking their choice of location, a trend she believes will persist.
“They are prioritizing their peace of mind and their education,” she said. Instead, they are considering studying in other countries, like Germany and Canada.
“This can adversely affect the U.S. education system overall,” Kalappadan said.
Oyekanmi thinks that Brown has done a good job supporting international students amid an uncertain federal landscape. But for students who may be required to leave the United States, she said she would want Brown to guarantee they would still be supported in completing their programs remotely.
Kalappadan added that she felt Brown could do more for the international community by providing international students with additional academic flexibility and advocating more strongly for its students amid federal policy changes.
“The only point of contact the international students have is the university they’re studying (at),” she said.
According to Director of International Student and Scholar Services Andrew Shiotani, the ISSS launched an information hub dedicated to this new visa rule. ISSS leaders are scheduled to meet with small groups to discuss the rule this week, he added.
“Internally, we’re identifying instructions, processes and forms that need to be revised and reworked once the final rule goes into effect,” he wrote in an email to The Herald. He encouraged students with concerns about the new rule to talk with their professors, advisors and individuals at Student Support Services.
Rachel Wicker is a senior staff writer covering affinity and identity. She is from Athens, Georgia and plans on concentrating in English on the nonfiction track and International and Public Affairs. Outside of writing, she enjoys reading books of any genre and doing yoga.
