Bipartisan congressional group calls on US administration to preserve Duration of Status for international student visas

There was something different about this year's annual NAFSA conference. The experience was wonderfully familiar in many ways, including the great conversations with colleagues, the many inspirational moments, and the steady drumbeat of new research and insights being shared around. The difference this year was the feeling of anticipation and concern in the air as delegates waited for an important rule change that is expected to be published by the US government any day.

The new rule will replace the current “Duration of Status” (D/S) admissions mechanism with fixed end dates, require students and exchange visitors to file formal extension applications with US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), shorten grace periods, and prevent programme changes.

We have written extensively on the rule change and so won't unpack it in great detail again here. Suffice to say it has the potential to be extremely disruptive for current and prospective international students in the US, and is therefore of great concern to international educators and stakeholders.

The main issues are:

• The time limits imposed by the new rule are impractical for many students. Because most students will need to extend their stay beyond the four-year limit imposed by the rule, this opens the door to processing delays and, most significantly, uncertainty in the student's academic pathway.

• That the extension decision will rest with USCIS under the new rule (as opposed to the student's institution as it does under the D/S system). This exposes the student, as one conference presenter put it, to "hard vetting opportunities" that could disrupt the student's programme or prevent them from progressing to further study or to Optional Practical Training (OPT).

Because of its significance, the response from US educators and stakeholders has been considerable. The proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on 28 August 2025 with a tight 30-day public comment period that closed on 29 September 2025. Even within that short window, the filing attracted more than 15,700 comments, the overwhelming majority of which were in opposition.

In its comment, for example, NAFSA said the proposed rule "would replace a proven, flexible policy that has served the nation, international students, and exchange visitors for decades with a policy that is duplicative, burdensome and creates uncertainty."

The Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration said that it "objects to this rule in full," asserting that, "Implementing the rule would have significantly greater economic effects than estimated by [Department of Homeland Security] on US higher education institutions, including from the loss of the international student population and economic costs to local communities."

Even so, on 5 May 2026, the Department of Homeland Security submitted the final rule to the Office of Management and Budget for review, which is the last procedural step before the final rule will be published in the Federal Register.

The general expectation within the sector is the rule will proceed. As NAFSA explains: "We expect OMB's review to be expeditious and for the rule to be published in the Federal Register in the not too distant future. The final rule will go into effect 60 days after publication."

A bipartisan appeal

Against all of that administrative process and critique, a notable, late-breaking development comes in the form of a 22 May letter from four members of Congress, with two Republican signatories and two Democrats.

The rare bipartisan appeal expresses the group's concern about the proposed rule, and asks the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of Management and Budget "to preserve Duration of Status and ensure efficient visa processing policies that support a stable environment for international students and scholars."

Reflecting some of the key points from the critical commentary filed during the 30-day period in September 2025, the letter sets out that, "Replacing D/S with a capped admission period of four years would require many students to seek repeated extensions, creating unnecessary administrative burdens, processing delays, and disruptions to academic continuity. These changes would undermine America’s ability to attract and retain top global talent at a time when competitor nations continue expanding efforts to recruit international students, researchers, and high-skilled STEM workers. Recent surveys found that nearly half of international graduate students and postdoctoral researchers would not have chosen to study in the United States if it had a fixed admission period."

The congressional representatives also describe some of the local and national impacts of falling international enrolments: "Maintaining D/S is also vital in our efforts to strengthen domestic talent pipelines and local economies. Because international students are generally ineligible for federal financial aid and often pay full tuition, they help sustain academic programs, expand institutional capacity, and support educational opportunities for American students. In fact, for every international student enrolled at a US public university, two additional American students are able to attend…If the United States experiences even a one-third decline in foreign STEM graduates, the country could lose 6 to 11 percent of its high-skilled STEM workforce. Economic research estimates that such a decline could reduce the U.S. GDP by $240 to $481 billion annually within a decade – creating fewer new businesses and jobs, reducing global competitiveness, and shrinking tax revenues that support public services and infrastructure."

For additional background, please see:

• "US to end 'Duration of Status' for F, J, and I visas and limit the time international students can study in the US"
• "US immigration officials allege OPT is being widely abused and say 'more actions are forthcoming'"