Georgia district court provides interim relief: Blocks termination of legal status of 133 international students

In a significant ruling, the US district court (Northern District of Georgia) has granted temporary relief to 133 international students who faced sudden termination of their Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) record. With their legal status terminated, had it not been for the district court’s intervention, the students would have had to deport.

The district court on Friday evening, issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), ordering the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to reinstate the plaintiffs’ SEVIS records retroactive to March 31, 2025. It also barred federal authorities from using or disclosing the students' personal information outside the scope of this litigation. By Tuesday, US government agencies (defendants to this case) have been ordered to file a notice of compliance with this order.

The students, all F-1 visa holders, had filed an urgent plea alleging unlawful actions by federal immigration authorities. This lawsuit is among the largest of its kind concerning SEVIS terminations. All of them were actively enrolled in colleges and universities throughout the US – many of them were weeks away from graduation, or were lawfully undergoing Optional Practical Training (OPT). International students can gain work experience under the OPT program for a year on completion of their studies, this period is further extended by two years for those from the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) streams.

Charles Kuck, founding partner of Kuck Baxter, an immigration law firm, who represented the students told TOI, “The overt ignoring of set immigration laws and policies by the Trump administration as it relates to foreign students is not just stunning, but dangerous. It sends a message that will reverberate for a generation as the best and most talented students that might have come to the US will consider and pursue their education options in other countries. This bad for America.”

All 133 international students proceeded with the lawsuit pseudonymously and had sought a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against officials from the (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and the US Attorney General. This was prompted by notices received between April 1 and April 14, informing them that their SEVIS records had been terminated—citing either criminal background checks, visa revocations, or alleged failure to maintain lawful status.

This lawsuit is among the largest of its kind concerning SEVIS terminations The students argued that the terminations were baseless and procedurally improper. They emphasized that they had no criminal records and had complied with all legal requirements of their student visas.

In their complaint, the students alleged violations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. They argued that the termination actions lacked proper notice, were devoid of an articulated legal basis, and were executed without giving them an opportunity to respond. The terminations, they claimed, were arbitrary, capricious, and beyond the legal authority granted to immigration agencies.

They contended that once admitted to the US with an F-1 visa, international students are granted permission to stay for the ‘duration of status’ as long as they meet the requirements of this visa - maintaining a full course of study and avoiding unauthorised employment.

In some, but not all of these cases, the US Department of State (DOS) has revoked the student’s visa. But, the revocation of a F-1 visa does not necessarily impact the person’s lawful presence in the country. As such, plaintiffs contended that it is the SEVIS registration termination that has rendered them vulnerable to devastating immigration outcomes such as detention and deportation, as well as irreparable harm.

The district court concurred with the plaintiffs, finding they had demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their case. Specifically, the district court held that DHS’s power to terminate F-1 status is tightly constrained by regulation and did not apply in this situation.

Judge Victoria Marie Calvert observed that visa revocation alone does not equate to a loss of legal immigration status and cannot be used to justify SEVIS termination. In particular she added, “There is substantial public interest in having governmental agencies abide by the federal laws that govern their existence and operations.”

According to immigration attorneys, this line captures the core of the district court's reasoning—it’s not just about protecting the students, but also about ensuring that government agencies act within the law. It underscores the principle that adherence to legal procedures is fundamental, even in matters involving immigration and national security.

Judge Calvert also acknowledged the irreparable harm the students faced: loss of educational opportunities, expulsion from the US on short notice, forfeiture of scholarships and jobs, and severe emotional distress. She cited similar rulings from other district courts that had intervened in SEVIS-related terminations, affirming the need for judicial oversight.

The court dismissed the argument that the students could have sought relief under the Privacy Act, noting that the act does not cover international students but applies to permanent residents (green card holders) and US citizens.