The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is advancing a regulatory proposal that could end the long-standing practice of allowing certain foreign nationals to remain in the country for the full duration of their academic or professional programs, replacing it with fixed visa periods.
The measure, recently approved by the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, targets the “duration of status” policy that currently applies to holders of F (student), J (exchange visitor), and I (foreign media) visas.
Under existing rules, these visa holders may stay in the U.S. as long as their program or assignment lasts, with no fixed departure date recorded on their I-94 arrival document. The system offers flexibility, particularly for programs with shifting timelines or extended research schedules.
If enacted, the new rule would impose predetermined visa terms — potentially two or four years, according to immigration experts familiar with an earlier version introduced during the Trump administration in 2020. Extensions beyond the fixed period would require formal applications to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, a process critics say can be costly, slow, and prone to bureaucratic backlogs.
Supporters of the proposal argue that fixed dates would strengthen immigration oversight and deter overstays or system misuse. Opponents, including universities, research institutions, and press advocacy groups, warn that it could create significant obstacles for individuals whose work is inherently unpredictable.
READ ALSO: Group petitions U.S. Embassy, seeks visa ban on Okpebholo over threats to Peter Obi
Graduate students engaged in multi-year research, for example, or foreign correspondents responding to fast-changing geopolitical events could face disruptions if forced to reapply for permission to stay mid-assignment.
The policy shift also carries weighty legal implications. Under current duration-of-status rules, visa holders typically do not accrue “unlawful presence” — which can trigger multi-year reentry bans — unless formally found in violation by immigration authorities or a judge. Switching to fixed expiration dates could mean even minor lapses, such as missing an extension deadline, may lead to severe immigration penalties.
The 2020 Trump-era version of the rule drew lawsuits from universities, professional associations, and advocacy groups before being shelved. Immigration attorneys predict the revived proposal may face similar legal challenges if it fails to account for the diverse and often unpredictable nature of academic and professional programs.
Once DHS publishes the proposal in the Federal Register, a 30- to 60-day public comment period will follow. After reviewing feedback and making potential adjustments, the agency will issue a final rule, outlining both the changes and the timeline for implementation.