Navigating The Immigration Landscape In 2026: What K-12 And Higher Education Institutions Need To Know

As we close out the year and head into 2026, the intersection of immigration policy and the education sector continue to evolve in complex ways. From increased federal scrutiny to policy changes that may impact how schools support international students and staff, institutions must remain agile and informed.

We sat down with William R. Hummel, head of Garfinkel Immigration Law Firm's Education Specialty Practice Group, to discuss the current challenges and practical steps schools, colleges, and universities should consider.

How would you describe the current state of immigration policy as it relates to educational institutions heading into 2026?

Right now, the most urgent focus for educational institutions should be compliance.

This includes two dimensions:

• Institutional compliance with SEVP requirements: Schools that enroll F-1 students need to ensure that their programs remain in full compliance with SEVP (Student and Exchange Visitor Program) guidelines and regulations. That includes readiness for SEVP site visits, as federal scrutiny across the entire immigration landscape has increased under the current administration. SEVP has made clear they have the right to visit campuses and work sites without notice, and there are confirmed reports of more SEVP visits and requesting for additional documentation during re-certification.
• Student-side compliance: Schools should also be actively advising F-1 students on emerging compliance trends, what they need to do to maintain their status, and ensuring they retain their eligibility to apply for future immigration benefits like OPT (Optional Practical Training) and nonimmigrant visas (like the H-1B). Missteps in maintaining status could have long-term consequences for these students.

What are the most pressing immigration issues that K-12 schools, colleges, and universities should be paying attention to right now?

Compliance remains top of mind, as we discussed before. In addition, institutions should have formal policies for what to do if immigration agents arrive on campus.

This is not a one-size-fits-all issue, as schools should create policies for enforcement activities, and what to do if agents arrive on campus, and SEVP compliance visits, which mainly focus on school operations, records, and adherence to F-1 regulations.

Developing these policies is important for all educational institutions right now.

Are there any differences in how public vs. private institutions are impacted by current immigration enforcement priorities?

At this time, there is no meaningful distinction between public and private institutions when it comes to how immigration enforcement policies are applied. All schools are advised to plan accordingly.

What is the current status of the $100,000 H-1B visa fee for nonprofit and educational institutions? Will colleges and universities be exempt, and what should they prepare for?

Unfortunately, colleges and universities do not qualify for any blanket exception. The one main exemption for all employers is that the $100,000 fee does not apply to those foreign nationals physically in the U.S. and eligible for a change of status.

Institutions should prepare by working closely with their immigration counsel to vet H-1B candidates carefully, confirming whether a change of status from within the U.S. is viable.

Are there any alternatives to the H-1B visa for schools and universities?

Yes. Especially, for colleges and universities, there are two possible alternatives, depending on the noncitizens' background:

• TN visas for Canadian and Mexican nationals under USMCA.
• O-1 visas for individuals who can demonstrate extraordinary ability in their field.

Both options have different eligibility criteria, so institutions should evaluate them in consultation with experienced immigration counsel.

What practical and legal impacts would the elimination of "Duration of Status" have on F, J, and I visa holders in higher education and K-12 institutions?

Removing "Duration of Status" (D/S), which currently allows F, J, and I visa holders to remain in the U.S. as long as they comply with the terms of their visa program, would have significant implications.

The shift would mean that all of these visa holders must now:

• Track and renew their immigration status by filing for specific extensions with USCIS (which would come with additional paperwork requirements and costs)
• Manage exact end dates of status with formal applications, which would add administrative burdens, processing fees, and risk of status lapses.

For institutions, this would translate into a larger compliance burden, more administrative work for DSOs and staff, and likely increased costs. From a broader perspective, the change could further reduce the appeal of the U.S. as a destination to study and/or research.

If Duration of Status is eliminated, how should universities prepare to track and manage the exact end dates of status for international students and scholars?

Schools may need to adopt new software to track status end dates and file timely extensions. These tools would come at a cost to the school system, and the additional expenses may eventually be passed along to students and scholars, further increasing the price of a U.S. education.

What are the implications of more aggressive visa vetting and social media screening for F-1 and J-1 students?

We're already seeing some of the effects of these policies. Students are facing longer visa processing times, and some are missing key travel windows, forcing them to delay the start date of their program. There are also reports of students withdrawing their U.S. admissions offer in favor of studying in other countries.

How can schools and Designated School Officials (DSO) best advise students and scholars who are concerned about social media content or arbitrary denials at consulates?

Schools and DSOs should encourage students and scholars to apply as early as possible for their visa and be prepared to articulate clearly the reasons why they chose the program and school. A proactive, well-documented application strategy can help institutions guide students through an increasingly unpredictable process while setting realistic expectations.

What does the elimination or non-renewal of many TPS designations mean for school staff, contractors, or parents who currently rely on TPS to live and work legally in the U.S.?

Right now, it appears that most of these populations are staying in the U.S. and in effect becoming part of the undocumented immigration population, which is a shame given many have been contributing to the U.S. economy and paying into our tax and social security system. Removing their TPS (and other similar programs) forces them into the shadows.

Especially for those that might be parents of U.S. citizens, this means additional stress for their children, who now must worry about the safety of their parents and have to adjust to their loss of income and financial support. Schools may need to consider how to support students and families facing this reality.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.