Court halts DHS rule ending “duration of status” for F-1 students; the old rules still apply
A final rule published July 17 was set to take effect Sept. 15, giving F and J students fixed admission periods capped at four years. A Massachusetts federal court granted nationwide preliminary relief on Sept. 14, so D/S remains in place. The government appealed to the First Circuit on Sept. 30, and the case continues.
Key points
- Now: D/S still applies. The rule has not taken effect, but it has not been struck down either. The government appealed to the First Circuit on Sept. 30 and said it would seek an expedited appeal; the appeals court has not ruled on anything yet.
- What it would do: admit F and J students for the program length on the I-20 or DS-2019, up to four years; require Form I-539 to extend; cut the F-1 post-completion grace period from 60 to 30 days.
- Scale: DHS estimates about 1.6 million F-1 and 500,000 J-1 admissions a year are affected, at a cost of about $448.6 million a year.
- Chinese students: 265,919 were in the U.S. in 2024/25, about 29% fewer than at the 2019/20 peak.
What the rule would change
Duration of status, or D/S, has long been how F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors are admitted: there is no fixed end date as long as they remain enrolled and their program is valid. A final rule DHS published on July 17, 2026, would replace it with fixed periods:
- F and J admission tied to the program end date on the I-20 or DS-2019, capped at four years (plus 30 days);
- anyone needing more time would file Form I-539 with USCIS, possibly with biometrics, for a discretionary decision;
- the F-1 post-completion grace period would shrink from 60 to 30 days, with new limits on transfers, program changes and additional degrees;
- current D/S students would transition to their program end date, capped at four years from the effective date; I-visa media representatives would get up to 240 days per admission.
Why the court stepped in
On Aug. 18, university groups, education organizations and unions sued in federal court in Massachusetts, arguing that DHS allowed too little time for public comment and exceeded its statutory authority. On Sept. 14, Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV found the plaintiffs likely to succeed on their Administrative Procedure Act claims and granted nationwide preliminary relief, postponing the rule. It did not take effect on Sept. 15, but the relief is temporary; the court has not ruled on the merits.
How many people are involved
Source: Institute of International Education (IIE), Open Doors reports. Chart by Hibee.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| 2019/20 | 372,532 |
| 2020/21 | 317,299 |
| 2021/22 | 290,086 |
| 2022/23 | 289,526 |
| 2023/24 | 277,398 |
| 2024/25 | 265,919 |
According to the Institute of International Education’s Open Doors report, 1,177,766 international students were in the U.S. in 2024/25, including 265,919 from China — down 4% from the prior year and about 29% below the 372,532 of 2019/20. IIE’s fall 2025 snapshot showed new international enrollment down another 17%.
Total: 1,177,766. Students on OPT remain in F-1 status.
Source: IIE, Open Doors 2025. Chart by Hibee.
| Item | Value |
|---|---|
| Graduate | 488,481 |
| Undergraduate | 357,231 |
| OPT | 294,253 |
| Non-degree | 37,801 |
DHS estimates the rule affects about 1.6 million F-1 and 500,000 J-1 admissions a year, at an annual cost of about $448.6 million to schools and students; at the proposal stage it projected roughly 220,000 additional F-1 extension requests a year. In comments on the proposal, economist Michael Clemens and others argued that DHS counted only direct burdens on individuals and understated the national economic impact.
What it means for you
- D/S still governs. If your I-94 says D/S, maintain status as usual.
- Watch the program end date on your I-20. If the rule is revived, you would need to request an extension before that date.
- If the rule is revived, re-entering the U.S. would produce an I-94 with a fixed end date; check the status of the case before traveling.
- OPT itself is unaffected, but if the rule returns, F-1 status during OPT would also be subject to fixed periods.
Timeline
- DHS publishes the proposed rule
- Final rule published, with an effective date of Sept. 15
- University groups, education organizations and unions sue
- Massachusetts federal court grants nationwide preliminary relief
- Scheduled effective date passes without the rule taking effect
- The government appeals to the First Circuit
Sources
- Study in the States (DHS): Final rule FAQ
- Envoy: Court delays the rule
- UC Berkeley International Office: Key provisions
- Mayer Brown: Cost estimate and side-by-side comparison
- Presidents’ Alliance: Litigation documents
- NAFSA: D/S litigation tracker, including the appeal
- IIE Open Doors 2025
Research and further reading
Wondering what this means for your case?
Hibee’s team can assess it against your status, timeline and employer.
This article reflects public information as of Oct. 15, 2026. It is for general information only and is not legal advice. Hibee is not a law firm; for your specific case, rely on the latest official guidance and a licensed attorney.
Related coverage
OPT fee proposal published: $70,000 for initial OPT, $30,000 for each later period, paid by schools
DHS published its OPT fee proposal in the Federal Register on Oct. 8. Schools would pay $70,000 for each student’s initial OPT and $30,000 for each later OPT period, including the STEM OPT extension, and could pass the cost on to students or employers. Comments are due Nov. 9; until a final rule takes effect, OPT works as before.
First year of the weighted H-1B lottery: registrations fall to 211,600, entry-level selections just 17.7%
FY2027 was the first H-1B season to weight selection by wage level. Eligible registrations fell 38.5% from the year before, and the share of selected beneficiaries with a U.S. advanced degree rose to 71.5%. USCIS has not yet released full selection rates by wage level.
Supreme Court upholds birthright citizenship 6–3; second executive order also blocked
On June 30, the Supreme Court held in Trump v. Barbara that Executive Order 14160 violates the 14th Amendment. On Aug. 6 the White House issued EO 14418, aimed at “birth tourism” and other groups; on Sept. 2 a federal court in Maryland preliminarily enjoined it for members of a certified class.
