article: COVID-19 Summary: This is a lawsuit brought by Harvard and MIT regarding the July 2020 release of ICE regulations which, in effect, meant that students on F-1 visas would risk deportation if their school shifted to online learning. On July 14, the parties informed the court that the government agreed to rescind the July 6 directive, as well as the associated FAQ on the ICE website, and also agreed to rescind the implementation of the directive. Instead, the government said it would return to the March policy. As a result, the court mooted the preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order motions and in October 2020, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal. <hr> <b>Background</b> Generally speaking, F-1 visas (colloquially "student visas") can be granted to international students who attend American universities. However, regulations on the granting of these visas limit the amount of online or distance learning the student can engage in. According to these regulations, an international student can engage in only one such class or three credits of that class per semester. 8 C.F.R. § 214.2(f)(6)(i)(G). The COVID-19 outbreak in early 2020 made this regulation untenable, as schools and universities had to shift to online learning systems. In response, defendant ICE issued an exemption on March 13, 2020, affirming that international students would be permitted to continue distance learning in the United States under their F-1 visas. The exemption would apply until the end of the emergency. However, on July 6, 2020, ICE issued a new directive stating that it would rescind that exemption. This directive would then mean that international students at schools that would still be fully online would have to either transfer to other schools that were at least partially in-person, go back to their countries voluntarily, or risk deportation. The directive also ordered schools that had gone fully online or had simply decided not to have classes to submit an "operational change plan" within nine days, and ordered schools that would have a hybrid system to certify each F-1 student to make sure that they were not taking entirely online courses. <b>The Lawsuit</b> This lawsuit was filed on July 8, 2020, two days after the directive was issued. Plaintiffs were the President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and were represented by private counsel. Defendants were the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The universities claimed that the new directive violated the Administrative Procedure Act in three ways: 1) the directive was arbitrary and capricious in that it failed to address the reliance interests of both universities that had already engaged in extensive planning and international students expectations of their immigration status; 2) the directive was arbitrary and capricious in that it failed to offer a reasoned basis to justify the policy; and 3) defendants failed to comply with notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures in issuing this directive. Plaintiffs sought injunctive relief in the form of a temporary restraining order as well as preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting the agencies from enforcing the new directive. Plaintiffs also requested that the court vacate and set aside the directive in addition to declaratory relief and attorney's fees and costs. The case was originally assigned to Judge Douglas P. Woodlock but he immediately recused himself and it was reassigned to Judge Allison D. Borroughs. Fifteen parties filed amicus briefs in support of the universities motion, representing the interests of dozens of higher education institutions, education nonprofits, labor unions, and tech corporations. On July 14, the parties informed the court that the government agreed to rescind the July 6 directive, as well as the associated FAQ on the ICE website, and also agreed to rescind the implementation of the directive. Instead, the government said it would return to the March policy. As a result, the court mooted the preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order motions. On October 6, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal.
summary: This lawsuit was filed in response to a July 6, 2020 ICE directive that would effectively force out of the country many international students studying remotely during the 2020 coronavirus pandemic. Harvard and MIT filed suit claiming that the directive was in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Plaintiffs sought a temporary restraining order, preliminary and permanent injunctions prohibiting defendants from enforcing the directive, and an order vacating and setting aside the policy. They also sought declarative relief and attorney's fees. On July 14, the parties informed the court that the government agreed to rescind the July 6 directive, as well as the associated FAQ on the ICE website, and also agreed to rescind the implementation of the directive. Instead, the government said it would return to the March policy. As a result, the court mooted the preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order motions. On October 6, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a notice of voluntary dismissal.