Thanks. It’s quite telling that DHS is threatening to apply the rule even if it’s the school that’s forcing the students online.
The current plan is to reopen earlier than normal, teach “hybrid” classes, and sprint to an early semester end (Thanksgiving instead of the week before Christmas; so no fall break). The hope is to not be caught in a shutdown and have to go online. That is the magical thinking plan and, yes, it is born out of the pressure.
Our contingent of foreign students stayed on campus when we shut down. We moved them into the dorms so they all had single rooms and delivered them their meals while they did their classes online. None went home for the summer because no one was sure they could get back into the US if they did, so we’ve been housing them in the dorms though we don’t have a summer term.
He’s already got all the racist voters. Good for Canadian universities though.
Because they are here on a special student visa, which requires attending classes. If they were gonna take all online classes, they dont need to come here to do that, now do they?
Look, this is a unfortunate situation, but it is the law. ICE is doing nothing wrong. (on this, anyway, they do other things wrong…)
Of course, trump could stop it with a executive order, but since panders to racist and xenophobes, he wont, of course.
Everything I’m reading says that this is a Trump administration directive. Can you provide a cite that they had to do this?
You seem to have forgotten they didn’t do this by choice, the school is (potentially) doing to them.
It shouldn’t need an executive order, the head of ICE (or DHS) could suspend the rule due to circumstances.
As someone who works in higher ed, with international students, your statement is not true.
First of all, the idea that students don’t need to be in the US if they’re taking online courses is mistaken. Sometimes in a particular term the courses they need are offered online, but the majority of their program is face to face. So they’re supposed to pack up and leave for a term and come back?
Coursework is not the only aspect to college. Even in online programs students can engage in professional activities, campus events, go to conferences etc.
Many countries may not have the infrastructure to support robust online learning, so we’re shutting those students out. I could go on.
However, there is absolutely no reason to do this under the circumstances in which the institution is making the decision to change modalities due to a public health crisis. Interrupting a student’s education, removing them from advisors, libraries, clubs, housing (often if they are here on country issued scholarships housing is included, but wouldn’t be if they were back home) etc is a terrible thing to do to a student. There is no benefit to the student, the university, or the US. It’s simply a political move to pressure higher ed to open up and target foreign nationals.
Spring of 2020, when the pandemic broke, ICE allowed foreign students to take fully online courses as universities moved to remote learning. They CHOSE to reverse this exemption ruling now.
And it should be noted that ICE already suspended the rule for the spring 2020 semester. This change for the fall is not a case of them having no choice but to enforce the rule - they’ve already demonstrated they could just waive the rule.
Not just pointless, but actually shooting ourselves in the foot.
From an economic standpoint, foreign students are literally a cash cow for the American economy. They’re generally not allowed to work (except in a limited way, on campus), so just about every dollar they spend is money brought into the United States from overseas. Not only do they pay (often inflated) tuition at colleges and universities, but they contribute greatly to their local economies when they pay rent, buy groceries, and otherwise spend a whole bunch of money.
But sure, lets kick them out in the middle of a national economic crisis. That totally makes sense.
Harvard and MIT just filed a lawsuit against the Feds to stop this nonsense. You can read the complaint here.
It is the United States privilege to decide which foreigner can enter the country, under what circumstances and to change the same at it’s complete and absolute discretion.
Foreigners have no rights except what the host country chooses to give them.
For a completely fucked up reason that has no bearing on security or any other lamebrained excuse. This is nothing more than petty viciousness.
Straw man. No one is asserting they can’t do it. We are asserting they shouldn’t do it.
Right! Plus, DrDeth asserted that they must do it, absent an executive order, which also appears false.
Irrelevant. They have the power (until 5 SCOTUS justices say otherwise)
Plus I don’t recall you complaining much when muslim students were being harassed by the FBI and INS after 9/11, again within the Gov rights to do so, but outrage seems selective.
It probably is but, what can you do.
AK84, you’re a lawyer, right?
Unfortunately, some lawyers on this message board (and, I guess, in the real world as well) have an approach that seems to say: “All I have is a hammer, so I’ll treat everything like a nail.” They tend to address any political or social or moral question by asking whether or not the law allows it, and stop there as if the answer to that question ends all debate. Over the years, I’ve had numerous run-ins with Bricker over this same issue.
I can’t stop you doing that, of course, but the title of this message board isn’t “What’s legal, and what isn’t?” The purpose of this message board isn’t to arrive at a list of lawful and unlawful actions. Sure, if someone is asking specifically about the legality of an issue, then by all means address that question. And there are plenty of debate topics where what is and is not lawful bears heavily on the question. I have also often criticized non-lawyers on the board who make legal pronouncements based not on what the law says, but on what they believe should be the case. They can be just as bad as lawyers who can’t move beyond the law.
In short, don’t be that type of lawyer.
Rather hard to do since ITD didn’t join the boards until 2005.
This is classic weaselly bullshit.
“I don’t remember you criticizing this other thing in the past.” Lame. The poster you’re addressing has almost 20,000 posts on this message board. Do you have evidence about what IvoryTowerDenizen did or didn’t think about FBI and INS targeting of Muslims?
Also, to be quite frank, if you don’t remember the large number of threads on this message board criticizing the US government’s treatment of Muslims—both those who were citizens and those who weren’t—in the years are 9/11, and criticizing the general anti-Muslim sentiment among large sections of the American population, then either you read the board very selectively, or you weren’t on the board at all.
The sooner you appreciate that legal points need errr legal views then perhaps you can stop having pointless arguement.
Don’t like a policy, vote for the guy wants to end it and is willing to take the risks to execute it (ie not Obama and Gitmo).
You want to have open borders or at least unencumbered movement then support policies and politic which make that a reality.
The “lawyers” as you refer to us with such derision all remember from law school tye dicta that the law of man isn’t the law of physics. Want to change it, change it, take the initiative to do so.