This week’s federal policy roundup covers immigration enforcement, civil liberties, public benefits, and free speech. From record civil fines designed to pressure immigrants to self-deport, to the first-ever invocation of a secretive terrorism removal court, to the State Department labeling Americans as foreign agents without evidence, this week’s developments reflect an escalating use of federal power against communities, dissent, and due process.
DHS Finalizes Four-Year Limit for International Student Visas
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) finalized a rule Friday replacing open-ended “duration of status” admissions with a fixed period of up to four years for F-1 students and J-1 exchange visitors. The rule is set to take effect on September 15. Students whose programs exceed their authorized period must apply for an extension, pay a fee, and demonstrate a qualifying reason, with approval subject to DHS review. The change could affect students in longer programs because the median bachelor’s degree takes 4.3 years to complete, and the median doctorate takes 5.7 years. The rule also shortens the post-completion grace period from 60 to 30 days and restricts school transfers and program changes, giving students less flexibility to complete or adjust their studies. The rule could further reduce international enrollment and weaken research pipelines in fields that rely heavily on international graduate students.
DHS Expands Civil Fines to Pressure Immigrants to Self-Deport
The Department of Homeland Security is imposing civil fines on immigrants who remain in the United States after receiving final removal orders, using authority from a 1996 immigration law. From January 2025 through mid-July 2026, ICE sent more than 103,000 fine notices totaling over $84 billion but collected approximately $1.2 million. Penalties are assessed at $998 per day and can reach about $1.8 million under the law’s five-year cap. DHS is offering to forgive fines if recipients leave through the CBP Home self-deportation app and is pursuing collection through wage garnishment, property seizure, and other measures. Recipients generally have 15 days to contest the fines. Legal challenges argue that the process violates due process the constitutional prohibition against excessive fines.
The Administration Withholds Additional Medicaid Funds from California and Minnesota
The Trump administration is withholding an additional $1.07 billion in federal Medicaid payments from California and Minnesota, bringing total withheld funds to approximately $1.3 billion from California and $450 million from Minnesota. Federal officials cited claims involving deceased enrollees, unusually high provider billing volumes, and Minnesota providers that failed background checks or site visits. California officials dispute the withholding of $391 million for in-home services that help older adults and people with disabilities avoid more expensive institutional care. Governors Gavin Newsom and Tim Walz described the holds as politically motivated. A federal judge previously called the administration’s actions historically unprecedented but declined to intervene because the pauses were temporary. Continued delays could disrupt provider payments and services for children, older adults, and people with disabilities.
Judge Temporarily Blocks USCIS Work Authorization Restrictions
A federal judge in Boston temporarily blocked USCIS policies Tuesday that could shorten or terminate work authorization for tens of thousands of asylum seekers and Temporary Protected Status (TPS) holders. The order prevents USCIS from retroactively applying new work authorization restrictions to TPS holders from El Salvador, Sudan, and Ukraine, including thousands whose work permits were set to expire beginning July 22. It also pauses policies that could reject asylum applications or terminate work authorization for failure to meet new requirements under a 2025 tax and spending law. USCIS may continue collecting a new asylum application fee but cannot penalize applicants for nonpayment while the order remains in effect. The ruling provides temporary relief only and does not restore or extend TPS itself.
SNAP Participation Falls by More Than 4 Million Following Eligibility Changes
More than 4 million people nationwide lost SNAP benefits between July 2025 and March 2026, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Data from 19 states show participation declined by approximately 2.4 million people, including more than 1 million children. It is estimated that more than 1.5 million children have lost benefits nationwide. Arizona experienced the largest documented decline, with more than 450,000 people losing SNAP and statewide enrollment falling by approximately half. The reductions follow tightened eligibility requirements and increased state screening responsibilities. States will also be required to share benefit costs beginning October 2027. Losing SNAP may also affect children’s access to WIC and free school meals, compounding food insecurity across families. We urge Congress to delay the state cost requirements and to support legislation that restores SNAP. You, too, can urge Congress to protect access to food assistance and reverse policies that are causing eligible families and children to lose critical nutrition support by sending an email to your officials here.
The Administration Invokes Specialized Court Allowing Secret Evidence
The Trump administration filed the first petition to invoke the Alien Terrorist Removal Court; a specialized federal court Congress created in 1996 but had never been used until this month. The court can order the removal of noncitizens accused of meeting the law’s broad definition of an “alien terrorist.” These proceedings allow the government to rely on classified evidence the individual may never fully see or meaningfully challenge. After reviewing the petition, the court declined to act immediately and directed the Justice Department to provide additional justification. The case could determine how the administration may use this previously untested authority and whether noncitizens accused of terrorism have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the government’s evidence. The outcome could have potentially significant consequences for due process and for Arab and Muslim communities that have long faced heightened scrutiny under U.S. counterterrorism policies.
Appeals Courts Split on Federal Court Review in Palestine Speech Cases
Federal appeals courts disagree on whether noncitizens detained and facing deportation based on protected speech may immediately challenge their detainment in federal court or must wait for their removal proceedings to first be processed through immigration courts. On July 23, a divided Fourth Circuit ruled that Georgetown researcher Badar Khan Suri, an Indian visa holder arrested over speech and associations related to Palestinian rights, may continue pursuing his constitutional claims over unlawful detention in federal district court while his immigration case proceeds. Just two days earlier, however, the Second Circuit ruled in Palestinian refugee Mohsen Mahdawi‘s case that before pursuing his constitutional claims, his removal proceedings must first be heard through the immigration court system, which is not independent and operates as part of the administration seeking the deportations within the Justice Department. The Fourth Circuit expressly rejected that reasoning, creating conflicting rules in different parts of the country that the U.S. Supreme Court may ultimately have to resolve. Neither appeals court decision authorizes the government to deport either plaintiff. Instead, the disagreement concerns whether noncitizens alleging they were detained or targeted in retaliation for protected speech may obtain prompt review from an independent federal judge or must wait until their immigration proceedings end. If federal court review is delayed until after those proceedings, noncitizens could remain detained for months or years while their constitutional claims go unheard. This split affects noncitizens’ access to federal review of unlawful detainment claims before removal proceedings are finalized in immigration courts.
State Department Targets the Speech of U.S. Organizations and Citizens, Including Members of Congress
The State Department listed more than 40 left-leaning Americans and U.S. organizations as part of a Cuban influence network on July 20, without citing any evidence of foreign direction. The list included Representative Ilhan Omar, New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani, journalist Amy Goodman, the Amazon Labor Union, the National Lawyers Guild, and the Democratic Socialists of America for conduct such as travel to Cuba or protected speech, like making public statements, or opposing U.S. sanctions. The report described McCarthy-era blacklists as effective, and attributed campus organizing for Palestine to Cuban influence, echoing the foreign policy rationale the government has used to detain and deport student protesters. While this report has no legal implications for the American individuals and organizations listed, it could lay the groundwork for future government attempts to target those named.