Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case fo…
The bill requires accredited U.S. institutions of higher education to immediately report to SEVIS if they become aware that an F‑1 or J‑1 student has participated in activity supporting or endorsing a foreign terrorist organization. If the Secretary of State determines participation is established, the student's F‑1 or J‑1 visa must be revoked and the Department of Homeland Security shall initiate removal proceedings.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties and free speech harms
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a substantive policy change by imposing a new mandatory reporting obligation on institutions of higher education and by directing visa revocation and removal actions tied to reported conduct.
The bill requires accredited U.S. institutions of higher education to immediately report to SEVIS if they become aware that an F‑1 or J‑1 student has participated in activity supporting or endorsing a foreign terrorist organization.
If the Secretary of State determines participation is established, the student's F‑1 or J‑1 visa must be revoked and the Department of Homeland Security shall initiate removal proceedings.
The bill defines “foreign terrorist organization,” “institution of higher education,” and “SEVIS” by reference to existing law.
Narrow, security‑oriented bill with unclear standards and potential constitutional challenges; likely opposition from education and civil‑liberties stakeholders.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a substantive policy change by imposing a new mandatory reporting obligation on institutions of higher education and by directing visa revocation and removal actions tied to reported conduct. It clearly identifies the actors and links to existing statutory references (SEVIS, INA, IIRIRA), but it leaves key terms, evidentiary standards, procedural steps, resourcing, and safeguards undefined.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties and free speech harms
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties and free speech harms
Likely skeptical of the bill overall.
Supportive of preventing terrorist activity, but concerned about vague standards, due process, academic freedom, and potential profiling of international students.
Cautiously supportive if narrowly and clearly implemented.
Values the security rationale but wants precise standards, implementation guidance, and protections against administrative overreach.
Strongly favorable.
Views the bill as a straightforward enforcement measure that helps remove visa holders who support foreign terrorist organizations and strengthens campus safety.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, security‑oriented bill with unclear standards and potential constitutional challenges; likely opposition from education and civil‑liberties stakeholders.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize civil liberties and free speech harms
Narrow, security‑oriented bill with unclear standards and potential constitutional challenges; likely opposition from education and civil‑l…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a substantive policy change by imposing a new mandatory reporting obligation on institutions of higher education and by directing visa revocation and remo…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.