Guidance for international students on US’s hostile regime

The speed with which the United States government has moved to arrest and deport international students and the way in which enforcement has disregarded basic constitutional protections and the rule of law have alarmed human rights and legal experts, not to mention the hundreds of students – and some scholars – being targeted.

The increasingly hostile regime being created via President Donald Trump’s Executive Orders and their interpretation and implementation by the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a federal agency, has triggered a plethora of new travel advice from governments and higher education institutions anxious to protect citizens more broadly, and students and academics specifically, from increasing incidents of detention, denial of entry, deportation and, according to one scholar rescue leader, Robert Quinn, being ‘disappeared’.

On 4 April, Canada updated its travel advisory for travelling to the United States, telling Canadians to “expect scrutiny at ports of entry including of electronic devices”.

The advisory instructed Canadians to “[c]omply and be forthcoming in all interactions with [American] border authorities”. It also warned: “If you are denied entry, you could be detained while awaiting deportation.”

This was the first warning about travelling to the United States to name “electronic devices”.

Denmark, Finland, France and Germany had previously warned travellers whose passports listed their gender as “X” that they could be refused entry into the US.

The United Kingdom recently strengthened the language of its guidance from “The authorities in the US set and enforce entry rules” to “You should comply with all entry, visa and other conditions of entry. The authorities in the US set and enforce entry rules strictly. You may be liable to arrest or detention if you break the rules.”

Meanwhile, on 27 March, a week before Canada updated its guidance, the Université de Montréal (UdeM) had become the first university outside the United States to issue guidance to its faculty and students on how to deal with American authorities and, in particular, to safeguard their electronic data.

For weeks, American universities had been issuing advisories to international students and faculty urging them not to leave the country for fear of what they would face at the US border and to their students and staff (both international and American) about what to do if US authorities came on to campus looking for an international student or faculty member.

At 11.30 pm on the night before UdeM issued its warning, Sunil Kumar, the president of Tufts University (Medford, Massachusetts, near Boston), sent an email to the university’s faculty, staff and students, as well as to the media, informing them that a student, Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish national and doctoral candidate in the Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Study and Human Development, had been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers.

A video of the arrest that has circulated widely shows Öztürk being pushed by six masked men devoid of official insignia into an unmarked car, in what a neighbour, whose surveillance video captured the moment, described as looking like “a kidnapping”.

Kumar’s statement, the first by a university about an international student being arrested by ICE, indicated part of the agency’s modus operandi: the suspension of the target student’s visa without having previously informed the university, which would have allowed the university to inform the student.

Kumar said that Tufts learnt only after Öztürk’s arrest that her “visa had been terminated”. Kumar pledged to keep the university community updated and reminded everyone that “the university had an established protocol for responding to government agents who arrive on campus (or off-campus) for an unannounced visit”.

In the context of the almost daily news stories about the arrests of international students, Kumar did not need to specify that “an unannounced visit” by ICE was almost certainly related to the investigation or arrest of an individual or individuals who entered the United States on study or work visas.

“International students on campuses are very concerned that there may be enforcement actions taken against them at unexpected times and without warning,” said Jaclyn Kelley-Widmer, who teaches at Cornell Law School and is director of Cornell’s 1L Immigration Law and Advocacy Clinic.

“It’s not just international students … scholars and professors and anyone else in the campus international community is feeling generally ill at ease on campus,” she noted.

International academic exchange

The first sentence of UdeM’s memo, which was signed by Alexander Chabot, the university’s general secretary, and Valérie Amiraux, its vice rector for community and international partnerships, minces no words.

It states: “The arrival of the new administration in the United States has raised many concerns in the academic world, particularly with regard to participation in scientific activities (congresses, conferences, courses, etcetera) and relations with American institutions of higher education and research institutes.”

Chabot and Amiraux urged “members of the university community to exercise caution when travelling south of the Canada-US border” and underscored that “US customs officers have the right to check your electronic devices (phone, computer, tablet) when you enter the United States, particularly during random checks”.

Chabot and Amiraux write: “If you refuse to provide them with the password to unlock your device, they may confiscate it, delay your journey or refuse you entry to the United States.” They warn: “Ensure your device does not contain any files with sensitive information.”

In an interview with The Canadian Press, Daniel Jutras, UdeM’s rector, expanded on this guidance: “Some of our scholars crossing the border travel with equipment that may in some circumstances contain research data, which we are in many cases under an obligation to protect …

“We’re telling our colleagues [to] be aware of that power [held by border guards] … Make sure that you do not travel with sensitive information that should not be seen by people outside of your circle.”

Importantly, UdeM has not asked its scholars to limit their international educational exchanges. Rather, it sees them as central to its contribution to the mission of universities writ large.

“In this particular context [that is, the Trump administration’s actions], the Université de Montréal encourages the members of its community to pursue their university collaborations with the United States in order to support its teaching and research mission while contributing to the collective defence of the essential role of universities in our societies.”

No time wasted

Less than 24 hours after Trump’s inauguration at noon on 20 January, an airport employee at Montréal’s Trudeau International Airport stopped Nathan Kalman-Lamb from entering the lineup for US customs. Like several other Canadian airports, Trudeau hosts a preclearance US customs unit.

Kalman-Lamb was travelling to the United States to speak about the recently published book he had co-authored with Derek Sylva, a sociology professor at the University of Western Ontario: The End of College Football: The Human Cost of an All-American Game.

The airport employee conducted Kalman-Lamb to a seat, where he was told to wait. A short while later, the airport employee returned with an official from the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is responsible for the border, who informed Kalman-Lamb that he was barred from the US and that he could not enter the US in the future without obtaining a special visa.

“I’m more than certain,” Kalman-Lamb told University World News, “that I was pulled aside because I have spoken out against the genocide occurring in Gaza and because last October, I moderated a keynote panel at the North American Society for Sociology of Sport conference in Chicago about the relationship between genocide and sport.

“Because of both of these, I ended up on the Canary Mission website [which doxxes critics of Israel] listed as an antisemite. Anyone who Googles my name will see that I’m on their website.”

Through the Advanced Passenger Information System, US border guards have access to passenger information on who is scheduled to fly on which plane into the United States; accordingly, the Americans knew to expect Kalman-Lamb.

Canary Mission is a privately funded organisation that, according to its website, “documents people and groups that promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews”. The website also states: “Every individual and organisation [listed on the website, many individuals with their pictures and employment information] has been carefully researched and sourced.”

At a news conference on 28 March, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio refused to affirm or deny whether “outside groups” were supplying the government with names: “Oh, bringing it [names] to us? Well, we’re not – we’re not going to talk about the process by which we’re identifying it because obviously we’re looking for more people.”

The second part of Kalman-Lamb’s story took place on 19 March, coincidentally the same day that the French government “expressed concern” after a French scientist belonging to the Paris-based Centre national de la recherche scientifique, travelling to a conference near Houston, was denied entry into the United States 10 days earlier.

Upon landing in Texas, the US border agents searched the scientist’s phone and computer before refusing him entry and detained him before sending him back to France the next day.

At the same time, Kalman-Lamb, on his way to a conference in South Carolina, spent a number of hours in American custody at Trudeau Airport.

Even though he had received a B-1/B-2 visa, the acquisition of which required an interview at the American consulate in Toronto, when he was crossed into American jurisdiction in the airport, he was fingerprinted and sent to secondary detention.

“I was held there for three hours and missed my flight. I had my phone searched, and I was subjected to an interview. They searched all my belongings. They went through every item I had in my wallet, meticulously, and asked about a piece of paper I had had in my wallet for three years.

“They went down a list of countries and wanted to know if I had ever been to those countries. They were all Muslim-majority countries, except for Israel, which was also on the list.

“They asked me if I had ever participated in protests that had turned violent or violent protests. They asked me three different questions about violent protests. And, then, basically, they made us wait,” said Kalman-Lamb.

“After three hours, the official came back into the detention area and said: ‘Okay, you can go through’. So, they did allow me into the country.

“When I enquired about whether this would be a problem in the future, they essentially said it would be a problem every time I crossed the border,” he noted.

The border guard encouraged Kalman-Lamb not to fly on to another Canadian airport, such as the main hub in Toronto, to catch a flight to South Carolina, because he would have to go through preclearance again. “His implication was that I would run into the same problem there,” Kalman-Lamb said.

Even Canadian professors with dual US-Canadian citizenship, like University of Calgary chemistry professor Jennifer Love, are concerned.

On 10 April, Love told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation she had cancelled plans to attend a conference in Hawaii because of fears that her social media posts critical of the Trump administration’s dismantling of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programmes would draw the ire of border guards.

“I don't want to elevate my particular status, but having a professor detained who is really supportive of [DEI] issues and has been very critical of the administration … they could use that as a message to other people,” she told CBC.

Exercising power in ‘unmarked ways’

In his 28 March press conference, Rubio said he had signed some 300 revocations of international visas, one of which would have removed Öztürk’s visa and another would have removed that of Mahmoud Khalil, a student at Columbia University who was arrested by ICE on 8 March and is being held in a jail in Louisiana.

An unknown number of hundreds of students ICE has arrested since Trump returned to power are also being held in one of two ICE prisons in Louisiana; both are privately owned and run by the GEO Group, the stock of which, according to the Louisiana Illuminator “has doubled” since Trump won the election in November.

Referring to both the method by which students like Öztürk were arrested and where they are being held (though on 4 April, NBC News reported that she had been moved to a prison in Vermont), Robert Quinn, founding executive director of the Scholars at Risk (SAR) Network, used the word “disappeared”, which is redolent of what occurred during the so-called “Dirty Wars” in Latin America during the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s, as well as in Brazil under Jair Bolsonaro and in the Philippines under Ferdinand Marcos and, more recently, Rodrigo Duterte.

“Coming at it from the experience of history and the human rights community,” Quinn explained, “the term [disappeared] is used to describe the dynamics of state authority or state agents exercising power often in unmarked ways, often at night, often in ways intended to circumvent opportunities for normal legal process [as Rubio emphasised, there is no appeal of a revocation of a visa because ‘you have the power to deny; you have the power to revoke’].”

Further, Quinn said, the US federal government is “disappear[ing] individuals by “mak[ing] it hard to find human beings who have been taken into custody by spiriting people away and making it hard for family and legal counsel to find them.”

“Chilling is the most mild word I could use for that,” he said.

Campaign promises

Since Trump’s election last November, American colleges and universities have issued guidance to both their international students and faculty, and about what to do if ICE comes onto their campuses.

Concern about how Trump would carry through with campaign promises to deport millions of immigrants, Cornell, Pennsylvania State, Wesleyan, and the University of Southern California, Brown, Northeastern, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Johns Hopkins and other universities told their international students to return from the Christmas break before Trump’s inauguration.

Cornell’s advisory said, in part: “A travel ban is likely to go into effect soon after inauguration. The ban is likely to include citizens of the countries targeted in the first Trump administration: Kyrgyzstan, Nigeria, Myanmar, Sudan, Tanzania, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, and Somalia. New countries could be added to this list, particularly China and India.”

Wesleyan’s Office of International Affairs sent out an email on Monday 18 November to international students studying under the F-1 visa.

It states, in part: “With the presidential inauguration happening on Monday, January 20, 2025, and uncertainties around President-elect Donald Trump’s plans for immigration-related policy, the safest way to avoid difficulty re-entering the country is to be physically present in the US on 19 January and the days thereafter of the spring semester.”

Similar warnings were issued before the spring break in March, after ICE had begun arresting students on or near campuses.

Columbia University, for example, told its international students that there had been new reports of a blanket travel ban from certain countries; this has not yet happened, though it is still rumoured.

In part, Columbia’s advisory reads: “While news reports suggest that additional scrutiny may be applied to nationals from some countries, the specifics of any potential restrictions have not yet been confirmed, and reports on the matter have varied.

“There is a possibility that new bans could affect countries similar to those affected in 2017, including Cuba, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen, in addition to Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“We want to advise Columbia students and scholars to exercise caution when planning international travel. If you are a citizen of one of these countries, we advise you to avoid non-essential travel outside of the US until more information is available …

“It is very important to keep in mind that we do not have definitive information, including which countries or visa categories would be affected or the timing of any potential restrictions.”

If ICE comes to campus …

At the same time, universities were issuing guidance about how to behave if ICE entered their campus.

Typical is Johns Hopkins’ “Guidance in Response to Question about Federal Immigration Enforcement” issued on 1 February.

It begins by saying: “Remain calm and advise students and staff that they do not have the authority to consent to entry or searches.” It also advises students and staff not to accept “any legal document” without contacting university authorities.

The guidance goes on to warn students, staff and faculty: “Do not attempt to obstruct the officers’ activities or block their movement in any facility.”

It emphasises: “Do not attempt to notify any person who may be subject to a federal immigration enforcement that federal law enforcement officers are present, or engage in any behaviour in an effort to enable them [the individual the officers are looking for] to leave the premises or hide.”

Every university’s advice stresses that ICE is allowed to operate on public parts of a campus without a warrant but requires a warrant or court order to enter private areas, such as dormitories.

Public is defined as “anywhere or place a member of the general public could be at any time”, Kelley-Widmer noted. Some places, like buildings that are open during the day but at night are locked and require a card to access, change status depending on whether the doors are locked.

Neither American citizens nor students or faculty holding visas are required to give ICE any information.

If stopped and questioned by ICE about someone else or something not pertaining to you, Kelley-Widmer said, “people can simply ask ICE whether they are free to go. That’s a good starting place if you don’t want to engage.”

If ICE says you are not free to go, Kelley-Widmer told University World News, “one option is to state that you are going to exercise your right to remain silent and you wish to speak to a lawyer.” The right to remain silent is protected by the Fifth Amendment, and the right to a lawyer is protected by the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Constitutional norms

After explaining this, Kelley-Widmer quickly referred to news reports about ICE not respecting constitutional norms.

“What we’ve seen, though, is that ICE is not necessarily respecting these rights. We’ve seen several international students detained without a lawyer and without the opportunity to present documents and without knowing in advance that their visas have been revoked.

“So, when I say that constitutional rights apply to everyone regardless of status, I recognise that this appears to be [accurate] in theory but lately has not been the practice we’ve observed.”

The revocation of a visa, which would immediately make a person like Öztürk an illegal alien, is, Kelley-Widmer said, an “administrative change” that has no effect on a person’s rights under the US Constitution.

“I think the rule of law is very delicate right now [in the United States], more so than at any other time in our recent history. I did not expect this level of enforcement this quickly. And I didn’t expect enforcement that so blatantly disregards basic constitutional protections and the rule of law that is in place,” said Kelley-Widmer.

It’s a free country, isn’t it?

“None of this is new, and we have seen this in history, and we have seen this in our work around the world,” said Quinn, whose office at New York University is in Greenwich Village, one of the places in the United States where free speech and freedom seem almost embedded in the cobblestones of Washington Square Park.

“What’s new is it’s happening in the United States and the pace and the callousness with which it’s happening.

“For most of my life, I lived under the privilege of saying it’s a free country – a very flippant comment that people would say to each other, just to be dismissive.

“We are now forced to live in a place where the profound meaning of ‘It’s a free country’, that we took for granted, is on the surface, right?

“This isn’t a partisan issue. I don’t care who you support in the election. This is about state power being exercised outside of the norms of legal process,” he said.