A single lawsuit, Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. DHS, now decides how three visa groups are admitted to the United States: F-1 students, J-1 exchange visitors, and I-visa foreign media representatives. The case, No. 1:26-cv-13799, was filed in the District of Massachusetts in August 2026.
Who brought the case
The plaintiffs include higher education associations and labor groups. NAFSA and the Presidents’ Alliance are joined by the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, the American Federation of Teachers and a graduate workers’ local, two United Auto Workers entities, and The NewsGuild-CWA. That mix explains why the case reaches beyond campuses to newsrooms.
What the rule would have changed
For about forty years, these groups have been admitted under Duration of status (D/S)The period of stay for F, J and I nonimmigrants, who are admitted for as long as they maintain their program or activity rather than until a fixed date. It appears as D/S on Form I-94.See it in the glossary. The DHS rule, published July 17, would have swapped that for fixed periods. The list below summarizes what would have changed for each group, drawn from the rule and the court record.
- F-1 students: admission capped at four years per period, with an extension of stay request to USCIS needed to remain longer, a 30-day rather than 60-day post-completion grace period, and tighter limits on transfers and program changes.
- J-1 exchange visitors: fixed admission tied to program dates, also capped at four years.
- I-visa journalists: admission of up to 240 days, with a shorter limit for certain passport holders.
Why it matters to each side
Universities and research programs said doctoral degrees and clinical training often run longer than four years, so many people would need extensions. In its account of the case, AIP noted that DHS General Counsel James Percival criticized the ruling, arguing that duration of status lets people stay for years on a student visa with minimal study. The plaintiffs said the rule would harm students, institutions and the economy.
What the court did
On September 14, 2026, Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV granted preliminary nationwide relief, postponing the rule while the lawsuit proceeds. The court’s reasoning centered on the Administrative Procedure Act: likely gaps in DHS’s cost analysis, its treatment of alternatives and public comments, and the link between fixed periods and fraud prevention. The written order is public.
The ruling is not final. The judge left open that vacating the rule may later be appropriate, and the case continues with a status conference on October 2. For what the order means for an individual student today, read our companion piece on what students can rely on now, or see how the system fits into the study and exchange visa categories.