Login
Home  |  Legal Resources  |  Publications

Cases & Developments

FILTERS

Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments

  • Date:

    United States v. Minnesota (D. Minn. Mar. 27, 2026)

    Opinion and Order Granting Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff, the United States, sued the state of Minnesota and the Minnesota Office of Higher Education, alleging that Minnesota’s in-state tuition law violates section 1623 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), which prohibits in-state tuition benefits for individuals who are not “lawfully present” in the United States, “on the basis of residence within a State,” unless a citizen is eligible for the same benefit without regard to state residency. The court held that, because Minnesota’s law allows a student to qualify for in-state tuition even if “their principal actual dwelling place is outside of Minnesota,” the law “[did] not determine eligibility . . . on the basis of residence,” and therefore was not preempted by IIRIRA. The court dismissed the government’s claims with prejudice.

    Topics:

    Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) | Employment of Foreign Nationals | Faculty & Staff | Immigration | International Students

  • Date:

    Akoju v. University of New Hampshire (D. N.H. Feb. 26, 2026)

    Opinion and Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order. Plaintiff, a former graduate student at the University of New Hampshire proceeding pro se, sued the university alleging violations of Title VII and the Fourteenth Amendment after the school terminated her enrollment, ended her SEVIS status, and evicted her from her dorm following her failure to pay more than $14,000 in outstanding charges on her student account. The court denied plaintiff’s request for a temporary restraining order (TRO), finding that plaintiff was unlikely to succeed on the merits of her claims because she received adequate notice of both the registration deadline and the consequences of failing to pay her balance. The court also found that the university’s actions were based on legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons that were consistent with institutional policies and not a pretext for discrimination or retaliation. Although the court acknowledged that plaintiff could suffer significant harm without injunctive relief, including the loss of her F-1 visa status, it found that this harm did not outweigh the deficiencies in her claims.  

    Topics:

    Constitutional Issues | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Due Process | Faculty & Staff | Immigration | International Students | Race and National Origin Discrimination | Retaliation | Student Housing | Students

  • Date:

    International Student Recruiting Firm Enters Settlement Agreement with Department of Justice on False Claims Act Allegations (Feb. 24, 2026) 

    The Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it has entered into a settlement agreement with the international student recruiting firm Study Across the Pond LLC (SATP) requiring the firm to pay $1.3 million to resolve allegations that SATP violated the False Claims Act when it knowingly caused foreign universities in the United Kingdom to submit false claims to the Department of Education (ED) through arrangements that violated the federal ban on incentive compensation. Specifically, the DOJ alleged that SATP demanded a share of the tuition paid to the universities for any students the company recruited and then created sham records to hide the tuition-sharing arrangements from ED.  

    Topics:

    Accreditation, Authorizations, & Higher Education Act | False Claims Act (FCA) | Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Higher Education Act (HEA) | Immigration | International Students | Research | Students

  • Date:

    OCR Enters into Agreements with 31 Colleges and Universities to End Partnerships with the PhD Project (Feb. 19, 2026)

    The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced that it has entered into 31 resolution agreements with institutions of higher education requiring them to cease their partnerships with the PhD project. In addition to ending collaboration with the PhD project, the institutions also agreed to conduct a review of their partnerships with external organizations to identify any that violate Title VI by restricting participation based on race. OCR indicated it is still negotiating with 14 schools.

    Topics:

    Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Employment of Foreign Nationals | Enforcement of Non-Discrimination Laws | Faculty & Staff | Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Immigration | Race and National Origin Discrimination | Students

  • Date:

    ACE Issue Brief: Immigration-Related Campus Concerns (Feb. 19, 2026) 

    The American Council on Education (ACE) published an issue brief providing guidance for campus leaders navigating the immigration policy environment under the Trump administration. The brief outlines the major categories of immigration status impacting higher education, issues related to DACA and international students, faculty, and staff, and provides guidance to campuses on potential enforcement actions.

    Topics:

    Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) | Employment of Foreign Nationals | Faculty & Staff | Immigration | International Students

  • Date:

    Fridley Public School District, et al., v. Kristi Noem, et al., (D. Minn. Feb. 4, 2026)

    Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. Plaintiffs, a coalition of school districts and a teachers union, sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and several federal officials, alleging that the implementation of the policy “Operation Metro Surge” in addition to the rescission of the previous longstanding “sensitive locations policy” violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) as arbitrary and capricious. Plaintiffs allege that the increase of ICE action at both K-12 schools and college campuses violate the rights of immigrants and create substantial disruption to the lives of U.S. citizens, noting that they have seen attendance declines of more than a third since the surge began. Plaintiffs further allege that the threat of enforcement has created a chilling effect and undermines access to education. Plaintiffs seek to permanently enjoin DHS from enforcing the new policy and to prohibit DHS agents from conducting immigration enforcement actions within 1,000 feet of school property or a school bus stop.

    Topics:

    Employment of Foreign Nationals | Faculty & Staff | Immigration | International Students

  • Date:

    ACE and 22 Other Higher Education Associations File Amicus Brief Supporting Injunction in Favor of Harvard University (Jan. 20, 2026)

    The American Council on Education (ACE), along with 22 other higher education associations, filed an amicus brief with the First Circuit, urging it to affirm a preliminary injunction issued in June 2025 blocking enforcement of the presidential proclamation “Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University,” which sought to bar international students from attending the university. The brief argues that the proclamation reflects an attempt to leverage immigration policy to punish the institution for perceived viewpoints and in doing so, would chill speech and academic decision-making across higher education. It also highlights the “targeted” and “punitive” nature of the proclamation, which permitted international students to enter the U.S. to study at any institution, other than Harvard. A summary of the arguments made in the brief may be found here.

    Topics:

    Immigration | International Students

  • Date:

    Virginia AG and DOJ Submit Joint Settlement Agreement to enjoin enforcement of Virginia Dream Act (E.D. Va. Dec. 30, 2025)

    In late December, the federal government sued the Commonwealth of Virginia challenging the Virginia Dream Act, which provides in-state tuition and financial assistance to undocumented students. The Department of Justice (DOJ) alleges that the law discriminates against U.S. citizens “who are not afforded the same reduced tuition rates, scholarships, or subsidies, [and] create[s] incentives for illegal immigration, and reward[s] illegal immigrants with benefits that U.S. citizens are not eligible for.” A day after the complaint was filed, the Virginia Attorney General and the DOJ submitted a joint motion for consent judgment to the court, which, if approved, would deem the law unconstitutional and bar state authorities from enforcing it. The lawsuit follows two Executive Orders signed by President Trump last year: “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders” and “Protecting American Communities from Criminal Aliens.” A copy of the complaint can be found here.

    Topics:

    Financial Aid, Scholarships, & Student Loans | Immigration | International Students | Students

  • Date:

    Department of Homeland Security Final Rule on Weighted Selection Process for Registrants and Petitioners Seeking to File Cap-Subject H-1B Petitions (Dec. 29, 2025)

    The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published its final rule on the current lottery system used to award H-1B visas to employers subject to the annual cap. The rule will implement a weighted selection process for H-1B registrations that will favor the allocation of H-1B visas to higher skilled and higher paid workers. The rule is set to go into effect on February 27, 2026 and is part of the FY 2027 H-1B lottery, beginning March 2026. (Currently, higher education institutions are exempt from the H-1B visa cap and lottery.)

    Topics:

    Employment of Foreign Nationals | Faculty & Staff | Immigration

  • Date:

    Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al., v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security (D.D.C. Dec. 23, 2025)

    Opinion Granting Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiffs, the Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities, brought a lawsuit challenging implementation of the September 19, 2025 Presidential Proclamation imposing a new $100,000 H-1B visa processing fee, asserting that the Proclamation was ultra vires and that its implementation violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, holding (1) because the Proclamation was issued pursuant to an express statutory grant of authority to the President under the Immigration and Nationality Act, it was not ultra vires; and (2) given the “lawfully authorized nature” of the Proclamation, defendants’ actions to implement it did not violate the APA. In dismissing the plaintiffs’ APA claims, the court concluded that defendants’ “mere implementation of a legally permissible Proclamation [was] not arbitrary or capricious or contrary to law” and further, their “lack of discretion to deviate from the President’s directives render[ed] any failure to engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking harmless error.” Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on December 29, 2025.

    Topics:

    Employment of Foreign Nationals | Faculty & Staff | Immigration

NACUA Annual Conference

Join us in the Music City June 29 – July 2 to connect, learn, and lead alongside higher education attorneys shaping policy, practice, and impact nationwide together.

Register