Beginning September 15, 2026, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is scheduled to make significant changes to the rules governing F-1 international students, J-1 exchange visitors, and representatives of foreign information media in I status.
Most importantly, F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors will no longer generally be admitted to the United States for “duration of status,” commonly shown as D/S on Form I-94.
Instead, individuals entering the United States in these classifications will receive a specific expiration date for their authorized stay. For F-1 and J-1 nonimmigrants, the period of admission will generally correspond to the length of the approved program, but may not exceed four years at a time.
The rule is currently scheduled to take effect on September 15, 2026. However, a coalition of higher education organizations and unions filed a federal lawsuit on August 18 seeking to block the rule before it takes effect.
For decades, most F-1 students have been admitted for duration of status rather than until a particular date.
Under the current system, an F-1 student generally remains authorized to stay in the United States while properly pursuing the program listed on the Form I-20, participating in authorized practical training, and otherwise maintaining F-1 status. A student whose program takes longer than anticipated can generally work with the school’s Designated School Official (DSO) to extend the program end date on the Form I-20 without separately asking U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to extend the student’s stay.
Under the new rule, this system will change.
Newly admitted F-1 students will receive a fixed period of admission through the program end date, up to a maximum of four years, followed by an additional 30-day period to depart or otherwise maintain lawful status.
One of the most significant consequences of the new rule is that a school will no longer always be able to extend a student’s authorized stay simply by extending the Form I-20.
If an F-1 student needs additional time beyond the student’s authorized admission period, the DSO must first recommend the program extension. The student will then generally need to file an application for extension of stay with USCIS, together with the updated Form I-20 and supporting evidence. USCIS—not the school—will ultimately decide whether the student receives additional time in F-1 status.
USCIS may require evidence that the student has maintained F-1 status, has sufficient financial resources, and has a qualifying reason for needing additional time. Acceptable reasons may include compelling academic circumstances, a documented medical condition, or circumstances beyond the student’s control.
Students should therefore begin planning for program extensions well before their authorized stay expires.
The move away from duration of status has potentially serious consequences if a student remains in the United States beyond the expiration of the authorized admission period.
Under the new system, F, J, and I nonimmigrants will generally begin accruing unlawful presence after the expiration of the fixed period of admission shown on their Form I-94 if they have not timely taken action to extend or otherwise maintain lawful status.
This is important because accumulating more than 180 days of unlawful presence followed by departure from the United States can trigger a three-year bar to admission, while one year or more can trigger a ten-year bar.
For students accustomed to looking primarily at their Form I-20 or SEVIS record, the expiration date on the Form I-94 will become especially important.
There is an important transition rule for students who are already in the United States in F-1 status and were admitted for D/S before September 15, 2026.
An F-1 or J-1 nonimmigrant who is properly maintaining status on September 15 generally will not suddenly receive a new I-94 expiration date. Instead, the individual may continue under the transition rules until the program end date on the current Form I-20 or DS-2019, or until September 15, 2030, whichever comes first.
However, international travel can change that result.
If an F-1 or J-1 nonimmigrant who was previously admitted for D/S leaves the United States after the new rule takes effect and then returns, CBP will generally admit the individual under the new fixed-period system and issue a Form I-94 containing a specific expiration date.
Students currently in the United States should therefore understand how international travel may affect their transition to the new system.
DHS also created temporary relief for some F-1 students applying for Optional Practical Training.
An F-1 student who remains under the D/S transition rules and timely files Form I-765 for post-completion OPT or a STEM OPT extension on or before March 18, 2027, generally will not also be required to file a separate extension-of-stay application solely because of the new rule.
The analysis may be different if the student travels internationally and is readmitted with a fixed expiration date before filing the OPT or STEM OPT application.
The new rule also reduces the period F-1 students generally have after completing their program or authorized practical training from 60 days to 30 days.
During that 30-day period, the student must depart the United States or take appropriate action to maintain lawful status. The change also affects the timing rules for post-completion OPT.
Students who complete or end their studies or training earlier than expected will similarly generally have 30 days from the new end date to depart or take other action to maintain lawful status.
The final rule makes several additional changes to the F-1 program.
Among them, DHS places new restrictions on changing schools, changing educational objectives, and pursuing additional programs at the same or a lower educational level. In general, a student who completes one educational level will be expected to progress to a higher educational level rather than begin another F-1 program at the same or a lower level. The rule also places additional restrictions on transfers and changes of educational objective for graduate-level students.
Some of these provisions may be delayed if DHS determines that SEVIS or other systems are not ready for implementation, so students and schools should continue watching for additional DHS and SEVP guidance.
On August 18, 2026, a coalition of higher education organizations and unions filed a lawsuit in federal court in Massachusetts challenging the new rule.
The plaintiffs include NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts, the American Federation of Teachers, and several other labor organizations representing students, researchers, educators, and journalists.
The lawsuit argues that DHS violated the Administrative Procedure Act in adopting the final rule. Among other claims, the plaintiffs contend that DHS did not provide an adequate opportunity for public comment, failed to meaningfully consider comments and less burdensome alternatives, did not adequately assess the costs and benefits of the rule, and exceeded its statutory authority.
The plaintiffs also argue that the rule will create substantial burdens for international students, universities, exchange visitors, and the federal agencies responsible for processing extension applications.
The lawsuit asks the federal court to block the rule from taking effect. The plaintiffs have also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to prevent implementation while the litigation proceeds.
As of August 19, 2026, the court has not blocked the rule. It remains scheduled to take effect on September 15, 2026. Students and universities should therefore continue preparing for implementation while closely monitoring the litigation.
Students should not assume that the lawsuit means the new rule will not take effect. Unless and until a court blocks the rule, September 15, 2026 remains the scheduled effective date.
At the same time, students should not assume that the new rule requires everyone currently in F-1 status to immediately file an extension application. The transition rules depend on the student’s current status, Form I-20, travel history, and future plans.
All F-1 students should become accustomed to checking their Form I-94 after every admission to the United States. If the rule takes effect as scheduled, students should pay particular attention to the specific expiration date listed on the I-94 and should address any apparent error immediately.
Students should also plan earlier for:
This is a major change to a system that international students and universities have relied on for decades. The newly filed lawsuit creates uncertainty about whether the rule will take effect as scheduled, but students should continue planning based on the current September 15 effective date unless a court orders otherwise.
At Delgado Rompf Bruen LLC, we are monitoring the litigation, implementation of the final rule, and additional guidance from DHS, USCIS, CBP, and the Student and Exchange Visitor Program. If you have questions about how the new rules may affect your F-1 status, international travel, OPT, or future academic plans, please contact our office to schedule a consultation.
One of the requirements for becoming a U.S. citizen through naturalization is demonstrating “good moral character,” often referred to as GMC. USCIS does not…
On June 30, 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision protecting birthright citizenship under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court held that children…
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has made an important change for religious workers in R-1 nonimmigrant status who reach the five-year maximum period…
I had the pleasure of working with Marta Delgado for my immigration petition. From the moment I met with Marta, I felt confident she was the attorney I was looking for after many years of waiting. I was so nervous going into this process, but Marta walked me through the details more than once, giving me so much peace about...
What a wonderful experience I had with Elizabeth and her team. Her professionalism made me feel at ease and comfortable throughout the process we went through. Thank you so much, Elizabeth!
I went through my Green Card and Citizenship applications with Elizabeth Rompf and every step of the way was fantastic. Incredibly professional, prompt, clear, and very attentive to details. I cannot recommend them enough! They're my absolute top pick for any immigration recommendations!
DRB helped us with securing a work visa for one of our staff members, communicated well, and helped explain the process.
I am full of gratitude while writing this review for Delgado Rompf Bruen Law. Thank you so much Marta for handling my case so beautifully. It has been only your diligence and professionalism in the work which guided my case to success. I am very fortunate to have you as an attorney. With other attorneys I've experienced ones who only...
Elizabeth and her legal team were extremely helpful in my husband's green card case. They had us so prepared that the interview was a piece of cake. We didn't have a single issue. They were quick to reply to any questions we had and were very honest with us about any possible issues we could have. I would highly recommend...
I began working with Martha after a decade of having my immigration process handled by attorneys that worked for my employers and everything changed immediately. Martha was invested in my personal story and circumstances and took all the time I needed to talk me through the options and process. She was consistently professional, knowledgable, and compassionate. She even leveraged her...
I've struggle for over 10 years to get my Permanent Resident status and have been represented by 4 immigration lawyers over that period. The last one I hired and who was able to resolve my immigration case is Elizabeth Rompf Bruen. The contrast of how she handled my case and the other 3 lawyers was obvious from the beginning. She...
Marta was the most professional, accurate and caring lawyer I’ve encountered in the 6 years I’ve been living in the US, her work ethics are unmatched and without doubt was the best decision for my process. I recommend her to anyone that needs help, you will feel listened and she is incredible when it comes to explaining this procedures in...
Elizabeth has been my immigration attorney on multiple cases. She handled my 3 different cases over past 7 years including the recent immigration case that got approval last month. Whenever I need attorney help, the only person I reach out to is Elizabeth. She is knowledgeable and very professional in handling any case. Elizabeth always kept me informed about the...
"*" indicates required fields
