The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.
Has the Trump administration put a hold on issuing student visas for this coming fall?
The Trump administration has paused new student visa interviews as part of an effort to expand social media screening for applicants. The State Department has instructed U.S. embassies and consulates to stop scheduling new student and exchange visitor visa appointments until further guidance is issued. However, previously scheduled interviews will still proceed.
Additionally the Trump Administration has temporarily halted new student and exchange visitor visa interviews at U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide while it expands social media screening for applicants. The pause applies to F, M, and J visa categories, but already scheduled interviews will proceed as planned
This move is part of a broader effort to increase vetting of international students, with concerns about national security and antisemitism cited as reasons for the expanded screening. Some universities, including Harvard, have already faced restrictions on enrolling international students. Critics argue that this policy could disrupt higher education and deter students from choosing the U.S. as a study destination
What are the specifics of the State Department directive?
The directive was widely circulated to all U.S. diplomatic and consular posts abroad and signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The State Department said it would issue further guidance to consulates and embassies in the coming days. “Effective immediately, in preparation for an expansion of required social media screening and vetting, consular sections should not add any additional student or exchange visitor visa appointment capacity," the cable said.
The memo also warned of “potentially significant implications for consular section operations, processes, and resource allocations” in a clear indication of the delay likely for student visa applications.
“Consular sections will need to take into consideration the workload and resource requirements of each case prior to scheduling them going forward,” the cable said, adding the priority should be on “services for U.S. citizens, immigrant visas, and fraud prevention.”
Has the Trump Administration provided any information on how long the temporary pause will last and what the new rules will be?
The State Department has not specified an end date for the pause, stating that further guidance will be issued in the coming days. The expanded vetting process aims to scrutinize applicants' social media activity, particularly posts perceived as hostile to U.S. interests.
What Impact will the pause have on international students?
- Delays and Uncertainty: Many students may miss enrollment deadlines due to visa processing delays, which forces them to defer admission or seek alternative options.
- Financial Losses: Students who have already paid non-refundable deposits for tuition, housing, and flights could lose money if they can’t secure a visa in time.
- Limited Travel: Some universities are warning students against traveling abroad this summer, fearing they may not be allowed to return.
- Social Media Scrutiny: The expanded social media screening could lead to visa denials based on online activity, raising concerns about privacy and free speech.
What additional actions did the Trump Administration take against China?
On May 28, the Trump administration announced that it would aggressively revoke visas for Chinese students, particularly those with connections to the Chinese Communist Party or studying in critical fields. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that the State Department will work with the Department of Homeland Security to enforce these revocations and revise visa criteria to enhance scrutiny of future applications from China and Hong Kong.
China has strongly opposed these measures, calling them harmful to students' legitimate rights and interests. The decision could have a significant impact on U.S. universities, which rely on international students for revenue and research contributions.
How Many Chinese Students attend United States Universities?
As of the 2023-2024 academic year, there were approximately 277,398 Chinese students enrolled in U.S. universities, making China the second-largest source of international students in the country. India recently overtook China as the top sender, with over 331,602 students.
Despite a slight decline in numbers, Chinese students continue to make up a significant portion of the international student population, particularly in fields such as engineering, business, and computer science. Their presence contributes to both academic research and university funding.
What Impact will the reduction in the number of international students have on Universities?
- Enrollment Decline: Universities that rely on international students—who make up a significant portion of their student body—could see a drop in enrollment.
- Financial Strain: International students often pay full tuition without federal aid, contributing billions to the U.S. economy. A decline in their numbers could hurt university budgets.
- Reputation Damage: The U.S. has long been a top destination for international students. If visa policies become too restrictive, students may opt for other countrie s, such as Canada, Australia, or the UK, instead.
How are Universities responding
- Some are taking a wait-and-see policy.
- Higher education groups, including the Association of International Educators, are lobbying lawmakers to reverse the policy, arguing that international students pose no security threat and contribute significantly to the U.S. economy.
- Harvard University has been at the center of legal action against the Trump administration regarding student visa restrictions. Additionally, a University of Cincinnati international student filed a lawsuit, resulting in a federal judge blocking the administration from revoking the student's visa.
- University leaders from MIT, Stanford, and the University of California system have issued joint statements condemning the policy.
- Some universities are offering remote learning options to help students who are affected continue their studies.
How many international students are there in the United States, and which University will be most impacted
As of the 2023/2024 academic year, the U.S. hosted over 1.1 million international students, marking a 7% increase from the previous year. These students make significant contributions to the economy and academic diversity.
Some universities have a high percentage of international students, which means they may be heavily affected by visa restrictions. The top institutions with the highest proportion of international students:
1. Illinois Institute of Technology – 51% of students are international.
2. Carnegie Mellon University – 44% international students.
3. Stevens Institute of Technology – 42% international students.
4. Northeastern University – 40% international students.
5. Columbia University – 40% international students.
6. New York University (NYU) – 37% international students.
Additionally, universities like Harvard, Stanford, and the University of California system have reported visa cancellations affecting their international students. Harvard alone has 27% international students, making it one of the most impacted institutions.
David Nevins is co-publisher of The Fulcrum and co-founder and board chairman of the Bridge Alliance Education Fund.
image of U.S. President Donald Trump is displayed on a digital billboard in Times Square in New York on April 8, 2026.
Trump is stuck between two realities. Neither serves the American people
Normally, I worry that events may overtake a column. But not so with the Iran war.
I don’t worry about running afoul of a headline or Truth Social post from the president because what is said about the situation is no longer very relevant to the reality.
On April 8, Nick Catoggio, my Dispatch colleague, dubbed an earlier stoppage with Iran “Schrödinger’s ceasefire.” This was a reference to the famous thought experiment by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger, who was trying to explain the weirdness of “superpositionality” in quantum physics. A cat in a box is both dead and alive at the same time until you open the box. Schrödinger meant to illustrate the absurdity of the idea that particles aren’t any one thing, but a “cloud of probabilities.”
The Trump administration is stuck in a word cloud of probabilities of his own making. The war is over. The war is on. The war isn’t a war. We have a deal, but we don’t have a deal, but we’re about to have a deal. We destroyed Iran’s military. No, we left it intact. We want regime change. No we don’t. We already accomplished it. We “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program a year ago. We had to go to war in February to prevent nuclear war. The Strait of Hormuz is open, closed, or something in-between. No deal without “unconditional surrender.” Let’s make a deal!
This everything-all-at-once vibe can be disorienting, particularly since most Americans didn’t have a war with Iran on their bingo cards until the shooting had already started. President Trump didn’t prepare the country or consult with Congress beforehand because he thought it would all be a smashing success in a matter of weeks.
The miscalculation that started it all: killing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and much of Iran’s senior leadership, on the first day of the war. To “the great proud people of Iran, I say tonight that the hour of your freedom is at hand,” Trump announced on Feb. 28. “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will be probably your only chance for generations.”
I support regime change in Iran and shed no tears for Khamenei or his goons. But when you start a war by killing the regime’s top leaders, it’s not unreasonable for the remaining ones to conclude that you really intend regime change.
Khamenei was a murderous fanatic, but he was a fairly cautious one. He liked to threaten closing the Strait of Hormuz or attacking our regional allies, but he was reluctant to actually do it, fearing it would invite a regime change war. The mullahs and IRGC goons believed, not unreasonably, that if they lost their grip on power, they’d be lynched by the Iranian people they’ve brutalized for decades.
By starting with a regime change war, Trump removed any reason for the regime not to go for broke. When you have nothing to lose — particularly when you are a millenarian religious fanatic — a Persian Alamo strategy makes a lot of sense.
So Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz and attacked its neighbors.
But it turns out this wasn’t the Alamo. In the contest of wills, Trump blinked. The Iranian regime’s tolerance for punishment proved — so far — to be greater than Trump’s and that of our gulf allies. Militarily we could finish the job, but that would require ground troops and much greater economic turmoil. In a conflict Trump launched unilaterally without the prior support of Congress, NATO or the American people, Trump doesn’t have the political capital for that.
But that’s only half the problem. Trump wants the war over, but he doesn’t want to pay — militarily, economically, politically — what that would cost. So he wants to make a deal that ends it. But there is no deal available that wouldn’t come at an equally undesirable cost. Any deal that looks like what President Obama struck with the Iranians would be too embarrassing to bear. But the Iranians are convinced that they can get just such a deal, and they’re willing to drag things out as long as it takes.
The result: Trump’s in a box of his own making. He thinks he can talk his way out by simply asserting a reality that doesn’t exist. When the financial markets get nervous, he announces a breakthrough that is, at best, a possibility. When the Iranians agree to a deal that looks similar to one Obama might negotiate, Trump goes back to his threats.
It can’t go on forever. But I’m sure it’ll last until long after this column is forgotten.
Jonah Goldberg is editor-in-chief of The Dispatch and the host of The Remnant podcast. His Twitter handle is @JonahDispatch.