ICE: Foreign Students Must Leave The U.S. If Their Colleges Go Online-Only This Fall

ICE has stated that if classes are online only this fall, foreign students cannot be issues their student visas. This could affect all foreign student athletes. Specifically in football, our beloved Oscar Bradburn.

Foreign students attending U.S. colleges that will operate entirely online this fall semester cannot remain in the country to do so, according to new regulations released Monday by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

As college students across the United States and around the world contemplate what their upcoming semester might look like, the federal guidance limits options for international students and leaves them with an uncomfortable choice: attend in-person classes during a pandemic or take them online from another country.

And for students enrolled in schools that have already announced plans to operate fully online, there is no choice. Under the new rules, the State Department will not issue them visas, and U.S. Customs and Border Protection will not allow them to enter the country.

"Active students currently in the United States enrolled in such programs must depart the country or take other measures, such as transferring to a school with in-person instruction to remain in lawful status," read a release from ICE's Student and Exchange Visitor Program. "If not, they may face immigration consequences including, but not limited to, the initiation of removal proceedings."

Additionally, if a school changes to online only, schools must update their status within 10 days. Which I believe means they must start the process of leaving the US to go home.

School reopening plans may be subject to change because of the evolving nature of the pandemic, especially with daily case totals continuing to break records in parts of the country.

In acknowledgment, the agency instructs schools to update their information in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System within 10 days of making the switch to online-only classes.

With a lot of schools planning to change to online only after Thanksgiving, it looks like foreign students will have to go home even if their sports season is not over. This will could greatly impact basketball at the start of the season and could impact football, specifically kicking and punting, at the end if we reach bowl season. Other sports may be hurt even more.

Link of FBS International Players

DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.

Comments

It's a lot bigger impact than just the athletes...
But a terrible policy no matter. If they are active in the classes, that should be enough. Weird times, weird circumstances, weird situations. It's not their fault.

To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
@BuryHokie #ThanksFrank

I know it affects a lot more people, but since TKP is more of a sports forum, I wanted to focus on that. I also think schools with active athletes will be the driving force to change this policy. Harvard also is already publicly against it per the article.

I didn't want to add it to the coronavirus thread as I thought it deserved its own thread.

Regardless of sports implications I imagine there are many international students that attend university here that do not have access to decent internet and will need to be in Blacksburg to do their online courses the same as there are many domestic (correct word?) students that will need to be in Blacksburg to have internet to participate in their classes. I know I would have needed to be there when I was a student. My family still does not have high speed internet at home where I grew up.

I think the answer here is a big maybe? Internet speeds and connection in the US is actually pretty bad vs the rest of the developed world, and I would think most, if not all, international students are coming from more urban areas where we would be focusing our academic recruiting. My guess is that the bigger worry about keeping a stable connection is going to be from those in some very rural parts of the commonwealth rather than those who are coming internationally, whereas the worry about international students is how to handle online only classes when your time zone is 6-12 hours off of Eastern Time.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

There will be international students facing the same difficulties as those domestically when it comes to access and connectivity is my point, the number of them is irrelevant. And yes I agree the time zone difference will also be a major hindrance for individuals.

Not to mention money. I knew several students whose governments paid for them to come to the US for an education in return for working for the Country when they returned to Africa after graduation. But the government paid for a trip to the states and a single trip back. They stayed during all holidays, breaks, and summers.

This made me start thinking, and yep... We are already considering the cancellation of work visas, and specifically H-1B visas, which are used heavily in the IT fields, under the umbrella of keeping ourselves safe during COVID.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

This news is a little old, the suspension has already been enacted. New H1B visa issuance has been suspended but current H1B visa holders in the US are not affected.

True. My company's business model is based on H1B employees, constantly replacing those whose visa expires with new arrivals. Since the issuance of new H1B visas is suspended, we won't be able to replace employees who have to leave because of visa expiration with new H1B arrivals. Our CIO is in panic mode.

This might be going too OT for this thread...if so mods, feel free to smite it.

Is it built on that model because suitable candidates cannot be found within the US, or is it built on that model because it's the cheaper route to go and doesn't tie the company to individuals since leadership knows that once the visa is up they don't have to deal with the employee anymore?

My experiences (again - I stress that this is anecdotal) working in IT/Tech is that both situations can be true:

  • Employers can 'try out' foreign talent remotely, and then when they 'prove themselves,' they can choose to pay the visa costs and bring them over. Most Americans would not agree to a 'try out' period.
  • It's a lot more difficult to find the talent in America (because there's less of it), which results in higher hiring/recruiting costs
  • Once they come over to America, foreign developers switch jobs at a much slower rate than Americans (in the tech space at least), which results in less training/recruiting costs
  • H1B Visas can be costly, so if all else is equal, companies would prefer to hire citizens, but again, that's rarely the case.

Edit:

is it built on that model because it's the cheaper route to go and doesn't tie the company to individuals since leadership knows that once the visa is up they don't have to deal with the employee anymore?

The bold part is false. Companies would prefer to keep high performers for as long as possible. As I mentioned above, the current Visa system allows employers to pay (cheaper) international rates while the individual lives abroad, and then, when they come to the US, the individual is less likely to leave for another company.

It's really a win-win for everyone. And (again, in my experience) talented American developers are in such short supply; they still win in this situation.

Twitter me

Agree with most of what you posted. For my company, it's about the bottom line, its never been the case that they couldn't find citizens. It's that they cannot find citizens willing to work for the wages they pay the H1B workers.

Generally, our customer facing employees, management, business analysts and a few others are citizens. The H1B employees are programmers and other systems folks. We lose a lot of institutional knowledge when the 6 year max is hit and the employee returns home.

H1B Visas can be costly, so if all else is equal, companies would prefer to hire citizens, but again, that's rarely the case.

Not as costly as hiring a citizen, not even close. EDIT: I should mention that my company very carefully monitors the ratio of citizens to H1B to avoid paying the $4k per H1B penalty fee.

talented American developers are in such short supply

When the H1B program was first implemented, it was strictly for supplementing areas where the skill set was in short supply. However, it quickly morphed into a replace expensive American workers with cheaper labor. So Americans are in short supply now because they haven't entered the programming field in the previous numbers. Heck, I think I read that even the people inside the Disney character costumes at their theme parks are on H1B visas!

6 years is wayyy longer than most Americans staying at a major tech company. I'm not involved in the hiring process (beyond interviewing) at any of the 3 tech companies I've worked at, but I can tell you that our foreign workers do better work, work longer hours, and stick around longer.

So Americans are in short supply now because they haven't entered the programming field in the previous numbers.

What? Per CNBC, Computer Science literally has the second highest paying opportunities of any field out of undergrad. The tech industry is barely effected by the current recession (relative to other industries). No kid is saying 'I'm not going to study programming because it's going to be too difficult to find a job.'

Twitter me

Its interesting, but I've had far, far more success working with H1B employees in my field over the years than US employees. I have found that US employees tend to be incredibly resistant to change, especially when it comes to changing methodologies to how we function. I honestly think the word agile has caused a few of my old coworkers to curl up into the fetal position because they couldn't always fall back on the "but this is how we always do things around here" anymore.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

We had to somewhat pull back from Agile. Our customers despised it.

I can relate to this. I'm working on a software modernization team, and the resistance to change is the biggest hurdle we have to cross. What we're trying to move to is stuff that industry has been doing for a decade, but would vastly improve the ability to maintain and update our software base. And we're still getting a lot of pushback because people just don't understand that the inertia of doing things the way we've always been doing things has fossilized us to the point where it takes far too long to incorporate new capabilities.

If you're not sure if my comment warrants a "/s", it probably does.

You mean like how in my office people are still using email as their main source for sending out files, thereby causing infinite versioning issues because they refuse to put them in a SharePoint library and when I utilize it they get mad that you send a link because THEY CANT WRAP THEIR MINDS AROUND THE IDEA THAT ONE DOCUMENT IS STORED IN ONE PLACE THAT EVERYONE CAN EDIT AND THEY FLAT OUT REFUSE TO UNDERSTAND......

"The Big Ten is always using excuses to cancel games with us. First Wisconsin. Then Wisconsin. After that, Wisconsin. The subsequent cancellation with Wisconsin comes to mind too. Now Penn State. What's next? Wisconsin?" -HorseOnATreadmill

About a year ago now I was on a team who was managing the operational pipeline of an entire development infrastructure of our company, handling the maintenance and installation efforts for a space of about 200 dev teams with thousands of applications who went through a strategic reorganization a few years prior to go full bore scrum for development work. Half of the team, pretty much with a line drawn on whether you had been with the company for more than 10 years or not, just dug in their heels and completely resisted the change and spent more time bickering about the 10-fold increase in volume of work coming through our team than actually making the time to figure out how to adjust our processes to meet their demands.

As of today, the team no longer exists. Management realized that it would be easier to just automate the entire process and reassign/layoff the entire team than to try and fight the battle anymore. Luckily, I saw the writing on the wall and took another job with another company back in the fall with a nice step up, but was later told that had I even tried to move internally, I would have had a difficult time because the actions of a few poisoned the entire well for the team.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

its never been the case that they couldn't find citizens. It's that they cannot find citizens willing to work for the wages they pay the H1B workers.

Pretty much this. We had a local software development business who fired most of their US citizen developers (average salary ~$65K) and brought in H1B's to replace them (paying them ~$38K IIRC, well below local market value). Businesses have all the leverage over H1B's because they can just let them go if they ask for more money. Once they're let go, they have to return to their home country, which means they can't just go to a competitor. It's dirty as hell.

I am under the impression that there are laws that state you can't grossly underpay your own employees (certainly not at ~50% less than what you mentioned). The law doesn't come to mind at the moment (and Google doesn't show anything), so I can't quite put my finger on it. I think its the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

EDIT: Found something on Google:

  • The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 addressed wage discrimination on the basis of age, religion, national origin, race, sex, and disability.
  • This fair wage act supplanted a Supreme Court ruling that wage discrimination cases must be filed within 180 days of the start of the discrimination.
  • The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Play Act effectively resets the clock by saying that wage discrimination cases can be filed within 180 days of the last paycheck in which the discrimination occurs.

I think this is implying, though, is that when a company "outsources" their work to India, China, and the likes, then they def pay their employees in that country much less than their US counterpart.

Deloitte, Tata, and other companies that do this a lot and will have a branch in, say, Delhi, and have customers in the US that they then "farm" the work out to them to do. These same employees in the foreign company usually have an H1B that allow them to come to the US for meetings etc, but their "home base" is in India (in this example), but are paid far less than what their US counterpart makes (but relatively more than the average person in India does).

This is in contrast to the point I was trying to make that if you have an H1B visa'd person that resides in, say, the DC area working for KPMG / Deloitte / etc., they are going to make a comparable amount of salary relative to a US citizen that is in the same position / job description as them.

It's akin to "cost of living" in that regard I think. Not justifying it one way or another, but wanted to try and clarify what I was trying to say earlier.

The company I used to work for got around this by forcing all their H1B employees to be employed through a corporate owned contracting firm that effectively prevented them from being compared equally to US based workers. By doing this, they received little to no corporate benefits like a health and retirement plan, and were barred from the corporate holiday parties. And we had no control over their contribution levels. If we felt like they deserved increased compensation, it had to be cleared through the contracting firm, which. was usually a futile effort. Only when they became full time employees would they then be treated as equals, with full benefits, and allowed to be comparably compensated to our US team members. If they were working out of India, they were employed through the India office, and had a completely different managerial chain than their stateside counterparts, despite doing the same job for the same team.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

This is in contrast to the point I was trying to make that if you have an H1B visa'd person that resides in, say, the DC area working for KPMG / Deloitte / etc., they are going to make a comparable amount of salary relative to a US citizen that is in the same position / job description as them.

This is true, but foreigners on an H1B have significantly less leverage when it comes to negotiations. Even if they're not abused (like Alum07 described above), they still have limited options, which means once they start a job, they'll always get 'company value,' not 'market value.' Which lends to them staying at places longer.

Twitter me

Yes most stay until they get their green card and then change jobs / get their value. They're held hostage by a company that will "sponsor" them which means they probably won't leave until they have an easier path to stay in the US and change jobs.

My wife came to the US on a student visa for graduate school. She stayed on an H1B. Then she met me and things went really well (talking marriage in ~1 month, engaged in ~1.5, months, and married in just over 12) and have been happily married for close to 15 years now. Her company - which has actually treated her quite well - offered to cover her whole immigration and Green Card and give lawyer support ... (I don't know for sure what all was offered) but we declined and paid it all ourselves because she would have been committed to the company for X-amount of time if we used them. She wanted the flexibility.

Recovering scientist working in business consulting

In my company, right here in the US, all of our contracts specify the work must be done onshore. The H1Bs are paid significantly less than citizens. The company gets around it by different job titles. Bottom line is there is always a way.

Not saying it's right, just saying it's done. And not just by my company, as I've seen similar things in other companies in my career.

If the economic return wasn't there, companies wouldn't bring in so many H1Bs unless there was an overwhelming demand that couldn't be filled with citizens. It's the reason there are proposals to up the minimum salary for H1Bs - the last proposal I heard was upping it to ~130k, to make it uneconomical for companies to do it.

All of my H1Bs live as cheaply as possible here and save as much $ as they can. When they return to India, they typically have enough saved up to where they don't have to work for a long time unless they want to. A few have bought businesses back home. One started a business with something to do with propane delivery and now is very wealthy, even by Western standards, all because he saved his $ while working in the US.

Would that be propane and propane accessories?

Maybe. I don't know all the details.

Makes sense if we are doing the same for work visas. You should have a standard policy across the board.

I can imagine no more rewarding a career. And any man who may be asked in this century what he did to make his life worthwhile, I think can respond with a good deal of pride and satisfaction:
β€œI served in the United States Navy"

KCCO

It makes zero sense. The suspension of work visas still allows workers who already have the visa and are in the US to continue working unaffected. The foreign student ban is 1000% worse because :

A. It bars current students from coming back to the US, and deports students currently in the US who have the bad fortune of studying in a completely online university (like...Harvard). Even worse is if the university goes fully online sometime the semester in the event of a local COVID outbreak for example, foreign students will be forced to leave. That is beyond cruel and shortsighted during an unprecedented time.

B. International students bring a TON of money into the school and town. International student tuition is used to subsidize tuition for American students. Foreign students dominate the graduate and post-graduate landscape which brings in a ton of research money into the university. Pushing away foreign students will potentially wreck Blacksburg which is already facing a tough rest of the year due to the neutered in-person semester. This isn't just about classes, it's about spending money in local restaurants, spending money on rent, on supplies, etc. that will be completely cut off.

This is an asinine rule that does little to protect jobs and does a lot to hurt colleges and the surrounding areas that rely on the cash flow foreign students bring. Not to mention pushing away top minds from coming to the United States and sharing their expertise. Pathetic.

I think the worst issue with this is the visa status change if the school goes online only in the middle of the semester. That would be a massive cost for international students to bear in order to get home before ICE would start the deportation process.

A massive cost plus difficulty since a lot of countries currently have closed borders. India for example have shut down all international flights. If there's another COVID spike not only would the students have to suffer financially but literally getting a flight back home could be impossible.

The cruelty is the point.

edit: just to clarify. I am not endorsing this policy in any way. It is despicable. COVID is simply being used as a convenient excuse to target immigrants of all kinds. I will refrain from commenting further as it will result in guideline violations.

This whole thread violates policy!

"Hey Bud, you wont have to hold the opponent to 17 points anymore."

Is it really necessary to downvote this?

Rick Monday... You Made a Great Play...

Romanes Eunt Domus

I didn't downvote, but it's an awful take on nearly every level.

Yes

Purely sports related:

Might affect Oscar Bradburn and Wilfried Pene for football as well as John Ojiako for basketball. Pene and Ojiako both played some high school ball over here, so not sure what their official status is.

Edit: Some schools give credit for sports, so that would count as an in person class, but not all schools do this.

stick it in, stick it in, stick it in!

😒

I've got this feeling
The tide is turning now baby
Funny feeling everything's gonna be alright now

A lot of Olympic athletes will be affected as well. When I was at school, golf, soccer, track and field all had many international athletes. My wife played with several Irish athletes at her school in field hockey.

There are at least 34 international student athletes enrolled at Tech (subject to change depending on if any spring seniors decide to take extra "free" year being offered by NCAA)

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

Partial count, not including new croots:

Three of our WBB players (Canada, Australia, France).
Nine of our MSOC players (Iceland, Norway, Finland, UK, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Ghana, Canada).
One of our WSOC players (Canada).
Five women's H2Okies (Hungary, UK, Bulgaria, Finland, Canada).
Three men's H2Okies (Italy, Bulgaria, Sweden).
Two men's golfers (South Africa x2).
Three women's golfers (Thailand, Australia, Germany).
One men's CC (Spain).
One football player (obvious).
Six men's tennis players (Australia x2, Denmark, Italy, Portugal, UK).
Six women's tennis players (Brazil, Portugal, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Israel).
Six women's track and field (Germany, Hungary, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Sweden x2).
Three men's track and field (UK, Spain, Greece).

That's 49 based on the hokiesports.com rosters, some of which haven't been updated which means I may have overcounted.

No, I *don't* want to go to the SEC. Why do you ask?

We don't love dem Hoos.

So we can add Pene to football. So 2 for football. I went based off article I read last year so there could be a lot of impacted student athletes.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

Terrible law for so many industries. This is going to destroy NCAA tennis though; teams from P5 schools are typically 75% foreign.

Twitter me

Friendly reminder to keep the discussion focused on the topic at hand as best as it relates to things within the purview of TKP. This is a minefield and I will ask everyone to avoid politics, which are unfortunately inextricably linked to this topic.

From the standpoint of someone who works at a university, this is devastating and idiotic. I will also note that I have read a few opinions of lawyers who say this policy has no force of law necessarily and it will probably get tied up in the courts for a while.

I wonder if it's best to simply close up shop now. The overall point has been made: This might affect NCAA athletes, students and Hokies, and the political line has already been flirted with, if not crossed.

Lock her up (the thread)

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

Sorry if this was a bit close to the line. I thought this was a very relevant article to VT, specifically on the sports front.

It's very relevant. Our Heisman dark horse is from Australia.

I want to leg this post, but it's already at +25, so here are two more legs.

If you're not sure if my comment warrants a "/s", it probably does.

Warning: this post occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)..

If you're not sure if my comment warrants a "/s", it probably does.

agreed. hard to stay non-political on such a shit policy

I have no doubt it would be tied up in courts for a while, but considering precedent, that won't stop ICE from carrying out deportations.

Never Forget #1 Overall Seed UVA 54, #64 UMBC 74

not with an injunction; or at least legally they wouldn't be able to.

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

This policy sucks on multiple levels - sports and otherwise.

Yeah it makes no sense at all they are saying 4 weeks before school opens that you have to drop your education, leave the country, or transfer!

How in gods name are You suppose to transfer????

Sorry but this is horrible policy and just cruel

Sean

Here's a list from r/cfb of all the football players impacted. I listed just the conferences:

ACC – 19
Big Ten – 15
Big 12 – 7 (includes Chubba Hubbard, who's Canadian)
Pac-12 – 21
SEC – 3
Independents – 7
American – 17
Conference USA – 5
Mid-American – 17
Mountain West – 26
Sun Belt – 6

Twitter me

Chubba Hubbard should be on the all name team. Please tell me he's an offensive Lineman.

He's the dark horse Heisman RB from Oklahoma State that recently had the spat with Gundy.

One of the best RB's in the country.

it's also chuba, not chubba πŸ’β€β™‚οΈ

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

I blame bar90 for that error.

Its also just as likely that the ICE did this as an attempt to essentially force universities to open back up in full this fall, which would possibly be even more insidious than kicking people out.

Any way you look at this, its really bad, and outright cruel.

Edit: Looks like this might be the case...

So even if the school goes to 'mostly online', they would need to file for an exception to this new policy, which would need to be approved so that students wouldn't be deported. The only way to guarantee that students would be allowed back would be to hold classes as normal.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

So could every course technically hold one class "in person" and make it "mandatory", let's say the first class of the semester and then never officially go online only? Would that satisfy the requirements. Or have one class for each course each week that is "in person" that is also live streamed for the students that may be "sick"?

Yeah I was thinking along these lines as well. I test things for a living and I'd be happy to try to find the ways in which I could break this policy in a wide variety of hilarious ways.

Given recent comments, I think the real reasoning is closer to what you mentioned first. Which I agree, is more craven than simply trying to remove immigrant students.

I will leave it at that as this is not the place for that conversation.

I mean, given yesterday's mandates from DeVos that all public schools nationally open up in full this fall, it really does sound like they are trying to force the issue here with universities.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

Yikes, this decimates Arizona's 2020 basketball recruiting class. They have 6 signees and 5 are from out of the country-these are dark days in Tucson.

Well, karma for Arizona's sucking at managing the pandemic.
Not political, fact, look at the numbers....

fin

COVID 19 is a virus. There is no "karma" associated with it.

karma's a chameleon anyway

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

Only if you're a boy, George.

Or maybe if it's unclear.

It is unclear, but it comes and goes

Hey some of us live in AZ. We don't all support the poor handling

Fair, I like to think hokies as a whole are doing the responsible things.

Dang... this sucks.

On a positive note, this thread is much more tame and focused than I anticipated. Way to go TKP FAM!!

Is coronavirus over yet?

As an international student who went to Tech, this is beyond terrible. Everyone has stated obvious reasons why it affects the university as well as the student, but there are hundreds of issues no one has brought up. I thought about all the apartments international students rent. How are you expected to pay for your rent while also paying rent in your home country. Who is going to sublease your apartment when not many people will be moving into Bburg. Is the leasing office going to help you opt out of your contract? Doubtful. What about furniture? Where are you going to store it if you're planning on returning in January? Also, textbooks. I doubt all the material will be online. So you need to purchase an expensive textbook and ship it all over the world? Internet speed has also been brought up which is a fair point. Not all students are coming from urban centers. Tech doesn't "recruit" students. Students apply and if their qualifications meet Tech's criteria for selection then you're in, but it's not the other way around. It's a shame how this is being handled, and I can't fathom why they're going about it this way.

EDIT: Didn't even mention time difference for students in Asia (I wonder how many of Tech's international students are from India, China, or the Middle East )

"I don't know what a Hokie is, but God is one of them. Go Virginia Tech." -Lee

Also, textbooks. I doubt all the material will be online. So you need to purchase an expensive textbook and ship it all over the world?

And good luck getting it shipped out to you before the school year starts, if it comes to that. And then there is the problem that many resources are regionally restricted, so you might have students in other countries who are literally unable to access the resources needed to complete their classes because it is restricted in their country.

And that's just from the side of the provider, then you also have to consider the firewalls that some countries put up that actively restrict what their citizens can view. I mean, if you're a student from China, there's a very real possibility that a governmental firewall is in place that would prevent you from accessing your own coursework, even if VT is able to find workarounds to free things up on their end.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

It's politics, pure and simply. There's not a monetary benefit, as you pointed out theres the loss of rent, tax revenue, local spending, etc., and there's not a competitive benefit as it drives away potential future employees from the US.

There's always a lighthouse. There's always a man. There's always a city.

Oof.. I didn't think about the rent part. The evictions are pretty bad down here. That would suck. Have to go back to your home country, can't pay or don't pay your rent, get an eviction, then have fun renting again.

This is why I hate locking threads, because had that happened, we wouldn't have benefited from this unique perspective or all of the considerations. Thanks for sharing, Nayo.

EDIT: Didn't even mention time difference for students in Asia (I wonder how many of Tech's international students are from India, China, or the Middle East )

If it's anything like my time at Tech (c/o 05 and 06)... a lot.

EDIT: I mean no disrespect whatsoever with my observation. Not sure why the DV, but go off, I guess.

No, I *don't* want to go to the SEC. Why do you ask?

We don't love dem Hoos.

I have a lot of thoughts relating to this as most of my colleagues working on their Ph.Ds are foreign, but a major part of why the United States is extremely good academically is that we attract people to study here then entice them to stay after the completion of their degree. Attracting top minds and convincing them to stay and generate more research is important to maintain this superiority. Most of my international colleagues wanted to stay in the U.S. after they finished, but they are increasingly worried its not feasible or safe for them to stay.

Edit - Also, for what its worth, research credits taken by graduate students count as in-person (being clarified by VT at least), so this doesn't immediately impact them.

This is simply unethical.

Related point - are any of the institutions going fully online proposing a tuition reduction? Doubt it. Instead of paying for the college experience, an international student is paying a lot of money to likely sit at home and take Zoom classes.

Many of them are here on scholarship, so the money isn't the issue. What happens when they leave; will they be able to get back in? And it's not just as simple to say they are going to sit at home and take Zoom classes. See what Nayo posted above.

To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
@BuryHokie #ThanksFrank

No doubt it creates a ton of issues and massive problems. But if your institution is going fully online and you potentially have to leave the country, I would also be mad at the institution if there's no tuition break for a totally online/remote environment. Some may be on scholarship or money may not be an issue, but I'm sure for some it still is.

At the very least, I would hope that schools that go to online only post-Thanksgiving would still be considered a hybrid model.

I would think so, except they mentioned that schools are expected to change the status of the student if the schools decide to go online only.

What exactly was the point of making this rule? I see no benefit to this. Most students are already here in the States. Student athletes, for the most part are already on campus. If this is to stop the coronavirus spread, we're the country rising, while a bulk of the rest of the world is opening back up. This is as egregious as Florida pushing to open in person school for k-12.

TKPhi Damn Proud
BSME 2009

What exactly was the point of making this rule? I see no benefit to this.

Economic benefit? I'd like to see how its spun to find something good there.

Political benefit? Well, it doesn't take much to realize to whom such a decision panders.

King Alum of the House Hokie, the First of His Name, Khal of the Turkey Legs, The rightful Heir to the Big Board, the Unbanned, Breaker of Trolls and Father of Gritty

can we please not

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

I don't see an economic benefit.

Won't talk politics b/c CG. Are taxes okay to discuss? B/c this process burdens taxpayers. A deportation is not cheap. Since schools don't benefit from tuition, they'll raise tuition on citizens, since funding continues to be cut...

TKPhi Damn Proud
BSME 2009

https://vtnews.vt.edu/articles/2020/07/international-sevp-guidance.html

Information for international VT students. If I'm reading this correctly, the post-Thanksgiving online-only status should not endanger anyone since the university's stated plan is hybrid instruction. As long as they are taking sufficient credits that qualify as in-person instruction, they are OK.

That's good news and I'm glad VT is being proactive about informing students.

Idea... Have students on campus for in-person classes.

Leonard. Duh.

That's so Leonard

There's always a lighthouse. There's always a man. There's always a city.

I came here just to say this.

I have no doubt that it's pretty easy to have some live classes happen, even if only for athletes.

Foreign students are foreign students, not immigrants.

And while I understand the angst, there is at least some logic to it.

I read somewhere (but haven't verified) that foreign students are only allowed to take one class online and maintain their visa status.

While I understand the convenience factor, and I'd advocate a lot more flexibility about it during the time of COVID, I do at least understand the logic of not allowing online universities to qualify for visas, as that might lead to other kinds of visa scams.

I'd certainly have an exception for scholarship athletes, assuming their sport is being played or has an in-person training component in place. And like I said, a lot of flexibility for people who have already started a program and who have limited options. Are you going to let all of these students out of their leases and contracts? It gets messy really fast.

Clearly a lot of thought needs to happen when adjusting these kinds of policies, as they can be very disruptive to people's educational (and life) plans. I'll be very surprised if they've given this amount of thought to this policy.

How is it a scam if they are a student enrolled in a university that is online only because you know, there's a pandemic going on?

not that every online-only is a university scam, but some of the very-for-profit online-only universities have been known for their predatory practices and the entire practice lends itself to being exploited by scammers.

also the idea of using enrolling in an online-only university as a pretext for obtaining a student visa (like mentioned in the comment) just screams of (a) gaming the system or (b) scamming the system or (c) exploiting or misleading people who think they are getting a student visa for enrolling as a student but don't meet the minimum requirements to qualify

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

That's why I specifically said "online only because you know, there's a pandemic going on". They aren't enrolling in online only degree mill universities. They are enrolled in universities that are temporarily online only due to a global pandemic. Once the US has a grip on this then classes will resume in person as they would have been if this had never occurred. What you brought up is an entirely different thing in itself to what I was asking.

Everyone knows there's a pandemic going on.

Situations of confusion and panic mean MORE scams, not fewer.

While I understand the convenience factor, and I'd advocate a lot more flexibility about it during the time of COVID, I do at least understand the logic of not allowing online universities to qualify for visas, as that might lead to other kinds of visa scams.

I dont understand what issue you have with this, which wasn't even my comment

"Why gobble gobble chumps asks such good questions, I will never know." - TheFifthFuller

Online-only universities and schools going to an online format due to the pandemic are entirely different things. I don't have any issue with what you said above, that makes sense. If someone is trying to use an online university as a way to justify moving to the US and qualifying for a visa then I am okay with blocking that (mostly because online only schools tend to be sham schools but that is personal opinion and we don't need to go there). Students should be allowed to come/stay if they are enrolled in programs that are moving to an online format because of the pandemic due to the reasons listed by many in this thread so long as they follow quarantine measures when they arrive.

I don't see how that's relevant. Read the complaint and you will see there is very specific reasoning why Harvard and MIT object. Many other universities will likely join. It's not just some Harvard thing. This is going to blow a hole in the entire nation's university system if it holds up.

I did read it. Although not a lawyer, it certainly read as a complaint vice a winnable case. It just seemed ironic that Harvard, who just got into trouble would DOJ, would be the one spearheading this.

Legally and factually they are completely unrelated. It's not even the same parties:

DOJ v. Prof. Lieberman

Harvard President v. DOJ

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

Obligatory comment for me: Harvard sucks!

Recovering scientist working in business consulting

The long and short of it is that Harvard and MIT are suggesting that ICE did not follow the rulemaking process required for Gov't agencies. Universities and foreign students relied on an exemption and that exemption was removed "arbitrarily and capriciously." Harvard and MIT are looking for an immediate temporary restraining order, followed by an injunction, then setting aside of this current policy set July 6 and reinstating the policy exemption from March.

In the end, my guess is that the Mass. District Court will grant the restraining order and the injunction. An injunction would mean that the July policy would not be enforced until the District Court rules that it is lawful. If the Administration and ICE want to fight this in court, they will. And if the Administration and ICE want to fight, the November election will ultimately determine whether this case ever reaches a verdict (i.e., election of a different Administration will concede to Harvard and MIT and thus reinstate the March policy or similar).

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

I have not dug into this but as I understood the exception a couple months ago, wasn't there an expiration date involved and various parties were expecting an extension and they simply did not get the extension, that the additional regulatory language were clarification of the original rule?

I could be way off on this as it has been several months and I may be misremembering this as something else. So much has happened in the past few months.

This is apparently something that was not allowed before the exception.
I would expect that if the legislators wanted to change the rule, it would be quite simple. This would then force the regulators to change back. How long can the regulators subvert the law as agreed to by the legislature in order to do "what's right"? The legislature should fix it if it needs fixing, in their eye.

This is going to be great for the ACC.

I haven't dug into it either, but the Complaint from Harvard suggests that exception was made in March and it was reverted July 6 by proclamation, not expiration. I don't know whether an expiration existed or if it was tied to the "state of emergency declaration," which is still ongoing as noted in the Complaint.

And yes, this was an established rule and exception was made in context to the COVID pandemic and the state of emergency regarding the pandemic. The July proclamation is essentially reversal of the exception (with some further detail).

Legislature could also solve this issue, in theory. Note that the Complaint doesn't say it violates any legislature specific to ICE or COVID, but violates the American Procedures Act (APA) that guides all of the Regulatory Agencies generated by Congress (e.g., FBI, CIA, NIH, CDC, FCC, HHS, ICE, FDA, NASA, NLRB, IRS, etc.). So, if the Legislature were to fix this, it would be by a different means than how Harvard is asking, and instead would be specifically writing out a law with the exemption Generally, the Legislature doesn't like to write out specific laws for Regulatory Agencies (it's major oversight). In addition, I don't see how Congress would be able to pass this specific exemption with the current Administration that is demonstrably trying to remove the exemption. I don't see enough GOP members willing to overrule a veto. And I also don't see how Congress would get a law like this initially passed for President's review in time for it to matter.

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

Minor note, neither the FBI or the CIA are regulatory agencies. The FBI is a criminal investigative, intelligence, counterterrorism and counterintelligence agency while the CIA is primarily an intellIgence and counterterrorism agency. They regulate nothing.

VTCC '86 Delta Company, Hokie in Peru, Former Naval Aviator, Former FBISA, Forever married to my VT87 girl. Go VT!

But some of them really make a bang on a Denver dance floor.

True. Administrative Agency is a more appropriate term.

CIA and FBI have their own special rules and in many situations the CIA and FBI are excepted from APA procedures (for obvious reasons).

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

the suit alleges that the exemption was for the duration of the emergency and the motive here is to force universities to re-open.

based on recent scotus ruling... "We address only whether the [Department of Homeland Security] complied with the procedural requirement that it provide a reasoned explanation for its action. Here the agency failed to consider the conspicuous issues of whether to retain forbearance and what if anything to do about the hardship to DACA recipients. That dual failure raises doubts about whether the agency appreciated the scope of its discretion or exercised that discretion in a reasonable manner."... I'd expect an injunction and if it ever goes to court, a finding that this violates APA

Was the proper procedure followed when making the exception?
If it was not, the complainant may win their suit with the court declaring the the exception made also did not follow the rules and there fore a reversal back to the original language is in order, making the result the same.

This is one reason why I have a specific distaste for piles of regulation, the whims of government change constantly. Making compliance hard for everyone.

This is going to be great for the ACC.

I've done dozens of federal rule makings. APA isn't complicated and compliance is relatively easy. It's a pain in the ass if you don't account for it but it protects citizens from the whims of their government; and keeps rogue officials in line.

In this case, they made the exception based on the emergency...so yes, no issue with procedure. In undoing the exception they just announced it, no rationale; they just did it. Big problem, imo.

https://www.ice.gov/news/releases/sevp-modifies-temporary-exemptions-non...

From a historical standpoint, providing rationale for a regulatory agency is super easy. The current Administration, however, is having trouble overcoming the extremely low bar of "arbitrary and capricious" as exemplified in the latest SCOTUS ruling regarding their termination of DACA.

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

yup; I quoted from that one earlier.

I wasn't going to get too deep but they have struggled mightily from the get-go.

This is one reason why I have a specific distaste for piles of regulation, the whims of government change constantly. Making compliance hard for everyone.

That's why there is a mandatory comment period to promulgate a regulatory rule. It can't be whimsical. Very few exceptions to regulatory rule promulgation without comment exist, and exception one happens to be when National emergency is declared.

Here is some info from a law firm analyzing emergency rule making and COVID: Link

Agencies have adopted regulations without following normal procedures in "emergency situations . . . or when delay could result in serious harm
...
In the COVID-19 context, Congress explicitly directed agencies to the good cause exception in enacting the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act ("CARES Act") due to the national emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Note it doesn't analyze the current situation of reverting a rule promulgated via emergency rule making. I'm sure the Gov't will counter that the new updated rule followed procedure because it was enacted due to the current condition of the COVID emergency.

πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ πŸ¦ƒ

This line of reasoning worked for those opposing the decision to end DACA. The Supreme Court just ruled that the government did not follow the rules and that the decision to terminate DACA was make arbitrarily and capriciously. I have no doubt that this would follow in the same direction, but the question is, at what timing?

If you're not sure if my comment warrants a "/s", it probably does.

Good. Hopefully they knock down this ignorant, hateful policy as soon as possible.

Do Harvard and MIT ever engage in anything jointly? I'd always had the idea that their relationship was somewhat adversarial.

Probably says something to the degree that this policy is loathed.

If you're not sure if my comment warrants a "/s", it probably does.

They have a ton of joint research and educational endeavors. They work closely on a lot of things.

At the start of the hearing for the Harvard/MIT lawsuit, the government announced it is rescinding this rule and will revert back to its states policies from March.

How much time and money did this cost schools and the government. How much anxiety and even Money did this cost students? How much of a black eye did this do around the world. Jesus. Glad to see someone came to their senses.

Wet stuff on the red stuff.

Join us in the Key Players Club

How much time and money did this cost...the government.

It's called Tuesday in the world of Government. Everything they do costs money and time.

To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
@BuryHokie #ThanksFrank

It's also called Tuesday in the world of private universities.

They'll more than get enough donations to cover it.

Glad to see someone came to their senses.

They had no chance; and it was making them no friends.

You beat me to it. Link to story HERE

The Trump administration on Tuesday rescinded a policy that would have stripped visas from international students whose courses move exclusively online amid the coronavirus pandemic.