Duration Of Status Rule Postponed Before It Takes Effect

A federal court in Massachusetts has postponed the effective date of the Department of Homeland Security rule that would have ended “duration of status” (D/S) admissions for F, J, and I nonimmigrants. The rule was scheduled to take effect today, September 15, 2026. This ruling changes the near-term timeline for affected students, exchange visitors, and foreign media representatives, as well as their sponsoring institutions and employers.

The District Court Postponed the Duration of Status Rule

On September 14, District Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV issued a preliminary injunction order in Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration v. United States Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:26-cv-13799 (D. Mass.), postponing the rule’s effective date under Section 705 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The Order enjoins DHS from taking further action to implement the rule while the litigation proceeds. The court denied requests for vacatur (invalidating the rule) and summary judgment without prejudice, meaning those requests may be renewed later in the course of litigation.

This is a postponement of implementation. It is not a final ruling that invalidates the rule. The order suggests the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that the rule violates the APA, but it is not a final determination. The court has scheduled a status conference for October 2, 2026, but that date should not be read as when the postponement will end. Further orders, a possible appeal, and DHS guidance could all affect the timeline going forward. For now, monitoring the progress of litigation is key.

There is currently no public guidance on how Customs and Border Protection (CBP) will treat F, J, and I nonimmigrants seeking reentry to the United States while the litigation is pending. Absent further notice, individuals should continue to be admitted for duration of status, but anyone traveling and returning to the United States in F, J, or I status must carefully review their CBP issued I-94 record upon return to the United States.

What This Means for Universities and Healthcare Institutions

Designated school officials, exchange visitor program officers, and international offices should pause implementation planning premised on a September 15 transition to fixed admission periods. Existing D/S obligations remain in effect, including maintaining the underlying course of study or exchange activity and reporting required changes through SEVIS. Institutions should identify which preparatory steps remain appropriate under the current framework, conferring with Klasko or immigration counsel, but should avoid signaling to visa holders that issues regarding implementation of the rule eliminating D/S have been resolved while litigation is ongoing.

Several questions remain open as the case proceeds. The October 2 status conference may clarify how long the postponement will last, but it is only a scheduling hearing. It is not a hearing on the merits of the rule’s validity. It is not yet clear whether DHS will appeal or seek to narrow the court’s order. Institutions that had already begun revising I-94 tracking systems, training materials, or advising protocols in anticipation of fixed admission periods should determine whether that work can continue in a form that remains useful regardless of the rule’s ultimate status, rather than assuming those protocols should be stopped entirely.

What This Means for Employers

Employers who sponsor F, J, or I visa holders should notify HR teams, hiring managers, and affected employees that the September 15 implementation date no longer applies and that current D/S rules remain in effect until further notice. This update does not change any prior requirements regarding F-1 employment authorization, such as filing timeframes to apply for post-completion OPT or STEM OPT extensions, nor does this update change I-9 requirements for these forms of employment authorization.

Employers should coordinate with affected employees and immigration counsel before making status, travel, or filing decisions that assume the fixed admission period rule is in effect, since duration of status remains the controlling framework. For example, employment tied to a pending STEM OPT extension still depends on the separate requirements for that extension, including timely filing and completion of relevant training plans. Employees who travel internationally should be advised to confirm their I-94 shows an Admit Until Date of “D/S” promptly upon reentry. If it does not, the employee should contact their DSO or program sponsor immediately for guidance as to how to have the I-94 corrected.

What This Means for Individuals

F, J, and I visa holders currently admitted for duration of status remain in D/S and should continue to be admitted to the United States in D/S following international travel. Individuals who elect to travel outside of the United States are reminded that the I-94 record alone – not the I-20, DS-2019, or visa stamp – controls the authorized period of stay in the United States. If the I-94 is issued with a specific Admit Until Date, rather than the proper D/S, the specific Admit Until Date would control (rather than the date on the I-20 or DS-2019) until a correction is obtained.

The court’s action also postpones several other changes in the final rule, including changes to F-1 grace periods. The court’s action does not restore status that was already terminated or extend work authorization that already expired.

Recommended next steps for individuals:

• Defer filing or travel decisions made solely in anticipation of the now-postponed rule, but remain prepared to act as needed if the rule proceeds to implementation
• Coordinate with a DSO or RO before requesting any program, major, or educational level change
• Consult with immigration counsel before relying on the postponement to determine OPT or extension strategy