Higher Ed Coalition Warns DHS Rule Could Erode U.S. Talent Pipeline

(UNITED STATES) A coalition of 54 U.S. higher education organizations is urging the Department of Homeland Security to withdraw a proposed rule that would end the long-standing duration of status (D/S) model for international students and exchange visitors. They warn the shift could weaken America’s role in the global education market.

Published on August 28, 2025, the proposed rule would replace the current D/S system with fixed admission terms generally capped at four years. Any stay beyond that would require a formal extension application to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). The public comment period closed on September 29, 2025, and DHS is now reviewing feedback.

Current D/S model vs. proposed change

Under the current D/S model, F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors can remain in the country as long as they maintain status—for example, full-time enrollment and proper work authorization—without a hard end date on admission.

DHS says the proposed rule aims to reduce “visa abuse” by so-called “forever students” and improve oversight. Colleges and immigration experts counter that the fixed timeline would create frequent disruptions and make the United States less appealing compared with countries that offer more stable study pathways.

Core feature of the proposal

• Fixed admission period: F-1 and J-1 visitors would be admitted for the length of their study program or up to four years, whichever is shorter.
• To continue beyond that point, students would need to file Form I-539, Application To Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status with USCIS, complete biometrics, and show proof they have maintained status—steps that add time and cost and could end in denial.
• The form is available at USCIS: Form I-539.

Other proposed regulatory changes

• Shortened F-1 grace period: Reduced from 60 days to 30 days after program completion (matching the current J-1 rule).
• Tight limits on academic changes: Blocking undergraduates from switching programs or majors in their first academic year and restricting graduate-level changes.
• No grace period after a denied extension: Requires immediate departure upon denial.
• Immediate accrual of unlawful presence: Remaining beyond the fixed end date without a timely extension would start unlawful presence immediately, raising the risk of three- or ten-year reentry bans.
• Biometrics and proof: DHS would require biometrics and detailed evidence of maintained status with each extension request.

Important: These changes would add administrative steps, fees, and potential denial risk for students who need to stay beyond an initial admission term.

Policy changes overview (summary)

1. Fixed limit on admission: Four years or program end date, whichever comes first; extensions via Form I-539.
2. Grace period cut to 30 days: For F-1 students finishing programs.
3. Limits on changes to study plans: Early transfers, changes of major, or shifts to new programs could be barred or restricted.
4. No cushion after denial: Immediate departure required if USCIS denies an extension.
5. Stricter proof requirements: Biometrics and detailed evidence required at extension.
6. Unlawful presence exposure: Overstaying the fixed period without a pending or approved extension triggers unlawful presence.

Higher education sector’s critique

Institutions and associations, led by the American Council on Education (ACE), argue the policy clashes with how academic programs operate.

• Many master’s and doctoral degrees extend past four years, especially when research, teaching, and lab milestones are involved.
• ACE warned: “If implemented, the rule would severely restrict the opportunities of international students and discourage them from choosing the United States.”
• Universities say SEVIS (Student and Exchange Visitor Information System) already provides strong monitoring, so extra review at extension would add costs without clear benefits.

The sector’s critique centers on five themes:

• Misalignment with academic timelines (e.g., multi-year research, thesis, clinical placements)
• Extra bureaucracy and likely USCIS processing delays
• Reduced flexibility for program changes
• Threats to U.S. competitiveness in attracting top students
• Overlap with existing compliance tools like SEVIS

Institutions emphasize that even one delayed extension could interrupt studies and risk status—especially during thesis defenses, lab cycles, or clinical placements.

Impact and practical implications

If finalized, the proposed rule could reshape planning for both students and schools.

• A typical 5–6 year PhD student would need to seek an extension mid-program, incurring added fees, biometrics appointments, and possible processing gaps.
• Undergraduates who realize their major is not a good fit may be stuck during the first academic year, slowing progress.
• Students with a denied extension would have to depart immediately, losing the current 60-day cushion many rely on to finalize matters or start Optional Practical Training (OPT).
• Universities fear a chilling effect on international applications, with ripple effects on tuition revenue, research output, and campus diversity.
• Campus international offices will face increased workloads preparing extension packets and advising students on tighter timelines.
• USCIS would receive more Form I-539 filings, potentially straining resources.

The broader concern: fewer international graduates may remain to fill key roles in science, technology, engineering, and health, or to continue into postdoctoral research and employment-based visa pathways.

Next steps, timeline, and legal considerations

• DHS has not finalized the policy. After the close of comments, the agency typically takes months to analyze feedback and decide whether to adopt the proposal, modify it, or withdraw it.
• Stakeholders are watching for any transition rules. DHS could:
  • “Grandfather” current F-1 and J-1 holders under the existing D/S system, or
  • Phase in changes over time.
• Legal challenges are possible if the final rule retains the strictest elements.

For official updates, readers can monitor DHS’s education portal at Study in the States.

Analysis and alternatives under discussion

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, DHS may face pressure to clarify how extensions will work for programs that depend on multi-year research milestones and for students moving between degree levels.

Policy groups have floated alternatives, including:

• A blended approach that keeps D/S while adding targeted checks.
• A longer fixed window (for example, 10 years) to reduce mid-program extensions and keep the U.S. attractive to top students.

Supporters of the proposed rule argue that clearer admission end dates will improve accountability. Opponents say the current D/S model already balances oversight with academic flexibility and that new limits would introduce avoidable risk.

Practical steps for students and institutions

Students and schools can take specific actions to prepare:

• Prepare for tighter planning cycles and build lead time for extension filings.
• Keep meticulous records of full-time enrollment, program progress, and any authorized work.
• International student offices should update advising materials and timelines—especially for those in long programs or considering a change of major.
• PhD candidates and lab managers should plan research milestones and committee reviews with a potential four-year cap in mind.

Final note

The stakes are high for students, universities, and the country’s research enterprise. Until DHS issues a final decision, the existing duration of status framework remains in place for all current F-1 and J-1 students and scholars. Institutions say they will continue to press for changes that protect integrity while keeping study pathways clear and predictable.