SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Trump admin caves to Harvard and MIT, won’t deport online-only students:
The Trump administration has rescinded a controversial policy that could have forced the deportation of foreign students who attend colleges that aren't offering in-person classes during the coronavirus pandemic.
As we reported last week, Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology sued the Trump administration to block the policy issued by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Under the policy change announced July 6, foreign students with nonimmigrant (F-1 and M-1) visas would have had to leave the United States or transfer to different schools that offer in-person classes.
But US officials agreed to rescind the new policy in a settlement with Harvard and MIT, as revealed [Tuesday] at a hearing on the case at US District Court for the District of Massachusetts. "At a short hearing Tuesday afternoon, US District Judge Allison Burroughs confirmed that a settlement had been reached," The Wall Street Journal reported. "She said the government would rescind the policy, withdraw an FAQ detailing the rule and return to the status quo of guidance issued in the spring."
Under a policy issued on March 13, which is back in effect because of the settlement, ICE provided an exemption to the rule that F-1 students must attend classes in person. The Harvard/MIT lawsuit pointed out that, when ICE issued this exemption, "the government made clear that this arrangement was 'in effect for the duration of the emergency.'" But the Trump administration's July 6 order reversed that policy despite the pandemic raging on and the fact that President Trump had not rescinded his national emergency declaration.
Harvard and MIT argued in their lawsuit that the Trump administration's July 6 policy change "is arbitrary and capricious because it fails to consider important aspects of the problem before the agency... fails to offer any reasoned basis that could justify the policy." The lawsuit also argues that the change violates a requirement to provide public notice and take comments.
Previously:
(2020-07-08) New Rules: Foreign Pupils Must Leave US if Classes Go Online-Only
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2020, @09:11PM (4 children)
Tune down your antenna a bit. I support Trump overall, but that doesn't mean I have to support everything he does. And some of the jobs of the federal government are to keep commerce flowing and protecting us from the overreach of state and local governments. There he had two major fizzles already this year, back in April when he suddenly left control of the shutdown policies to the states, and now when he dropped the plan to hold Big Education to resume classes without an indication that they were going to commit to reopen.
IMO it won't be enough to just point the finger at Democrat's screwups until the election. We need constructive action from our president to get our country back.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday July 16 2020, @10:10PM
Who has "taken " your country?
The president's party hold all of the levers of power, except the House.
If you can only name two occasions your president has had "major fizzles" this year, you should pay more attention.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 17 2020, @12:26AM (2 children)
You really have no idea how government in the US works do you?
The federal government can do many things, but no matter how much you might want it to be true, state and local governments always had full authority over their health systems/pandemic responses.
Trump's fuck ups were numerous, but not using the authority he doesn't have wasn't one of them.
As for the schools, again the Federal government doesn't control, or have authority over even public schools (K-12 or post-secondary), let alone private schools.
In fact, when he says that he'll "cut off money" from schools that don't open for in-person classes, it's actually two untruths. One lie and one misrepresentation.
1. Cutting off funding for schools that don't open for in person classes is a straight-up, bald-faced lie. Firstly, the law regarding federal funding of schools doesn't allow the President or the Secretary of Education to withhold funds except in specific, unusual circumstances. What's more, most of the Federal funding for K-12 for this year *has already been disbursed*.
2. Even if Trump *could* withhold such funds, Federal funds make up less than 10% of K-12 education spending in the US. As such, while it might be irritating to many school districts, it certainly wouldn't put any of them at risk of being unable to function. Which makes it a misrepresentation of the actual state of affairs.
The attempt to cancel visas for foreign students was just a cruel ploy to try to get universities to open for in-person classes.
Since at least some of the school administrations impacted aren't sociopaths, they demurred. Mostly because they're not willing to be responsible for more unnecessary deaths just to win Trump some political points.
Both of those "fuck ups" (scare quotes because they weren't just accidents, they are cruel, selfish grasping at straws attempts to bolster Trump politically, and everyone else be damned) are craven, short-sighted attempts to get folks back to work by giving their kids a place to go during the day. Given the current out of control state of the pandemic in the US, that would pretty much guarantee more unnecessary deaths, just so Trump can win some political points before the election.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 17 2020, @02:34PM (1 child)
It is also to "own the libs", whatever that means. I saw recently a bit on how some of the MAGA crowd are now seeking out masks that specifically don't do anything to mitigate the spread of covid. It is so they can wear them, knowing full well that they are not designed to do what their intent is, but so they can "own the libs". Think about that for a moment. They are unwilling to wear a simple piece of cloth, much less a surgical mask, to help tamp down a public health issue, but they will wear something on their faces specifically for the purpose that it doesn't do anything to mitigate the issue, but so they can have their adolescent thrill of "bucking authority" and "owning the libs". Just think about what that really says about them.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday July 18 2020, @12:45AM
It says they're in the same mental state (and level of development) as a defiant little three year old who purposefully shits his pants and runs around in shitty pants specifically because his mother told him to use the pot.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...