This story was originally produced by the New Hampshire Bulletin, an independent local newsroom that allows NHPR and other outlets to republish its reporting.
On April 3, Xiaotian Liu was continuing research for his computer science doctorate at Dartmouth College. On April 4, he was informed by the college that he needed to stop.
The college had run a check on Xiaotian’s F-1 student immigration status and discovered something unusual: Without warning, his status had been revoked. Without the status, Xiaotian could not continue with his work.
Five days later, that decision has been halted, temporarily, after a federal judge in New Hampshire said Wednesday she would block the Trump administration’s apparent revocation of the status.
But it remains unclear why the student’s immigration status was revoked in the first place — and whether the change in status was intentional or accidental.
Xiaotian sued the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. District Court of New Hampshire to block that change, arguing it had deprived him of due process rights by not informing him of the change or allowing him to respond. After a hearing Wednesday morning, Judge Samantha Elliott said she would issue a temporary restraining order against the department, which would reverse the change in status for two weeks.
The same court will hold a hearing in the next two weeks on a much more extensive motion for a preliminary injunction against the status change.
Xiaotian is one of two Dartmouth students to see their immigration status changed last week — and one of nearly 300 students across the country in recent days, according to the New York Times.
The F-1 status is given to international students to allow them to complete their studies at an American college or university. It is different from an entry visa; there is currently no indication that Xiaotian’s visa has been revoked.
Representatives of the Department of Homeland Security did not inform Xiaotian that his immigration status had been changed, according to his attorneys. He learned of the change on Friday, after the college informed him of it after reviewing its records, they said.
The doctoral student is being represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire and Ronald Abramson of Shaheen & Gordon.
Because Xiaotian has lost his status, he has had to pause his Ph.D. research and is no longer receiving compensation for his work, his attorneys said in court Wednesday. He is also fearful of being detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as other students have been, his attorneys said.
On March 25, a video of a Tufts student, Rumeysa Ozturk, being detained on the street in Somerville, Mass., by ICE officers sparked alarm among immigration advocates and students, and fueled protests.
A lawyer for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Raphael Katz, argued the court should not issue the restraining order because Xiaotian had not established that he would suffer “immediate and irreparable harm” if the court did nothing. Katz said Xiaotian could continue attending classes at Dartmouth College, even if he can’t continue his research. And he said Xiaotian could transfer his credits to a university outside of the U.S. if he wanted.
Katz said he could not provide the court information about why Xiaotian’s status was changed or confirm whether Xiaotian’s status was even changed. He said he was still awaiting information from the Department of Homeland Security.
“I don’t have the facts to establish why the change in status happened,” he said in court.
“At this point, can you tell me whether this was intentional or a mistake?” Elliott asked. Katz said he could not.
And Katz declined to tell the court whether there was a risk that Xiaotian might be detained.
“Unfortunately, the government can’t make any representation on its enforcement priorities,” he said.
Elliott said that plaintiffs had sufficiently shown that there is irreparable harm.
“He’s not getting paid; he’s not working toward his Ph.D.,” she said.
In making their case, attorneys for Xiaotian stressed the unusual nature of the government’s action. Typically, colleges and universities will monitor their own international students and recommend to the federal department if a student’s F-1 status should be revoked. That arrangement — where schools police their own students — has been the case under the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System, or SEVIS, which was created in 2003 in response to the September 11 attacks.
“What typically happens is that the status change is at the initiative of the university, because the university becomes aware of the fact, for example, that a student is no longer in school, (or) the student has dropped out,” said Gilles Bissonnette, legal director of the ACLU of New Hampshire, at a press conference after the hearing. “This reverse situation is what’s incredibly novel and unique, and it’s one of the reasons why there’s not a lot of legal authority out here on this with respect to case law.”
In Xiaotian’s case, DHS has provided no explanation for the halt. In court, Kim noted he had no criminal record.
“The plaintiff hasn’t committed any crime,” said SangYeob Kim, senior staff attorney at the ACLU of New Hampshire. “Not even a parking ticket. He doesn’t even own a car.”
It is not immediately clear when the hearing for Xiaotian’s preliminary injunction motion will take place, but attorneys said they expected it within the next week.
Attorneys for the Department of Homeland Security are expected to show up at that hearing to make the government’s case, Katz said.
The New Hampshire lawsuit is one of several waged across the country by students who also had their F-1 status abruptly terminated. Two students at two different colleges in California are suing the department. And one student in Pennsylvania has initiated a class-action lawsuit, seeking to represent all people whose F-1 status has been revoked because of criminal charges that do not interfere with students’ “normal progress toward completion of a course of study.”
At the press conference, Bissonnette did not comment on whether the ACLU has been in contact with the second Dartmouth student whose F-1 status was reportedly revoked.
But he said that regardless of Elliott’s ruling, each affected student will likely need to sue the government independently in order to reverse the status change. But he said a favorable district court ruling could set a precedent that others could follow.
And Abramson noted the revocation of the F-1 status came despite no apparent criminal violation.
“The presidential campaign and the messaging coming out of the administration has been that we’re going to focus on serious criminals and that that’s the problem with immigration in this country,” said Abramson. “This sort of process, and the fact that we have to expend nonprofit resources, private resources, government resources to respond to this situation flies in the face of that and makes us have to question if that’s really the motivation here at all.”
New Hampshire Bulletin is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. New Hampshire Bulletin maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Dana Wormald for questions: info@newhampshirebulletin.com.
