⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

We hear Harvard College against the Department of Homeland Security in the First Circuit. In April twenty twenty-five, Harvard rejected government demands to change its admissions, hiring and university governance. DHS also requested disciplinary records about foreign students and disputed whether Harvard had adequately responded. On May twenty-second, DHS revoked Harvard's certification to enroll international students on F visas. Harvard sued the next day, and the district court blocked that withdrawal. On June fourth, President Trump issued a separate proclamation restricting entry for foreign students and exchange visitors headed to Harvard, but not to other universities. On June twenty-third, the judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking its implementation, finding Harvard likely to succeed on First Amendment claims. That was temporary protection during the lawsuit, not a final decision on the case's merits. The government appeals that injunction. The central statute, section eleven eighty-two, subsection f, allows the President to restrict entry by noncitizens after finding it detrimental to United States interests. The government says the proclamation lawfully addresses national security and reporting concerns; Harvard says it punishes the university's views and lawsuits. Tiberius Davis will argue for the government. The presidential entry restriction expired on December fourth, twenty twenty-five. That raises mootness: whether a live dispute remains for the court to decide, rather than an abstract legal question.

Harvard College v. DHS (No. 25-1627) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, argued October 6, 2026.