Blog

In the good old days – prior to January 20, 2025 – visa revocation was not the end of the world for a student if he or she was in the US at the time of receiving the notification. As long as the student remained in the US, he or she was able to continue with the academic program. Yes, the email from the consulate notifying the student of the revocation was very unpleasant, but the revocation only took effect upon departure from the US. And so thousands of students, including those who had been impacted by the AzTech/ Integra/ Wireclass/ Findream/ Sinocontech/ Acuity OPT scandal, were able to continue their studies. Not anymore.

Over this past week, the Trump Administration has not only notified certain foreign students that their visas have been revoked, but terminated their SEVIS registration – in essence, ending their current ability to study in the US. The reasons run the gamut: political speech, speeding tickets, domestic disputes, arrest, driving without insurance. The Administration has been using a variety of tracking mechanisms, including social media and databases containing fingerprints, to identify these student visa holders.

Suspicions of going to work illegally? Check. Suspicions of marrying a US citizen? Check. Suspicions of remaining in the US? Check. These are all common reasons for the inspector of Customs and Border Protection at an airport or a land border port-of-entry to invoke Section 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I), denying their entry, and sending the person home. But criticizing the President of the United States? This is as American as apple pie; this is the Land of Free Speech, after all, right? Right? Apparently not in the eyes of CBP inspectors who have just stopped the entry of a French scientist because CBP found text messages on his phone that apparently criticized the Trump administration’s policies on academic research. This not only bodes poorly for visa and ESTA holders over the next four years, but for visa applicants.

When one thinks of visas and visa processing, the first US government entities that come to mind are the embassies and consulates outside the United States. These embassies and consulates are under the domain of the Department of State; the visa officers that the applicant meets are employees of the Department of State. And it is true that the overwhelming majority of visa applications are resolved on-the-spot by these visa officers, called consuls. But with the proliferation of US government agencies and each agency having its finger in the “visa pie,” it is more and more likely that other agencies will be involved in the process, be it HSI, FBI, DOT, DEA. What are these abbreviations? What is this alphabet soup? And how do they impact the visa applicant? I am glad you asked.

Embedded inside many US embassies and consulates abroad are officers of Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations (ICE HSI). They screen more than 1 million visa applicants a year at 44 visa issuing posts in 29 countries as part of its Visa Security Program (VSP). This is a parallel apparatus working alongside consular officers. These agents are extremely active in conducting investigations and compiling reports on individuals, called ROIs – Reports of Investigation. They enter inadmissibility determinations to ensure that applicants do not receive visas. ICE HSI findings of misrepresentations (212(a)(6)(C)(i)), unlawful activity (212(a)(3)(A)(ii)), and terrorism (212(a)(3)(B)) are common.

For visa problems one should always try to resolve the issue with the embassy, consulate or State Department first. Visa applicants do indeed have rights. But once those rights or your patience have been exhausted, one may consider the possibility of a lawsuit.

The problem is that as a general rule, visa denials are not subject to judicial review under the doctrine of consular nonreviewability. This was recently reaffirmed by the Supreme Court in Muñoz v. Department of State. The onslaught of anti-immigrant actions and rhetoric by the Trump Administration can also be intimidating to visa applicants. But there are exceptions to the rule barring judicial review of visa cases and visa denials. Sometimes the mere filing of the lawsuit can impact the case. While this area of the law is fluid and unpredictable, courts have recognized some exceptions, including:

It is like a game of whack-a-mole: one OPT scam company is closed and another one opens; one is shut down, another one commences operations. By now foreign students should be aware of the existence of these scam companies, and those who have been victimized should understand that there may be a remedy.

As background, the roll call of companies implicated in the OPT scandal include AzTech, Integra, Wireclass, Andwill, Findream, Tellon Trading, Arecy, Sinocontech, Masswell, CG Max Design, Global IT Experts, Apex IT, and XCG Design. Our Freedom of Information Act request turned up more than 190 pages of US government information on AzTech alone, with nearly 2,000 foreign students from more than 20 countries and 70 universities associated with it alone. These scam companies generally followed the same template: they pretended to be real OPT employers, targeting foreign students who need to meet employment requirements. In exchange for fees paid in advance, these companies claimed to offer “OPT compliance:” “training,” “job placement,” and documentation confirming “employment.”