Order Code RL31146
Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Foreign Students in the United States:
Policies and Legislation
Updated January 24, 2003
Ruth Ellen Wasem
Specialist in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

Foreign Students in the United States:
Policies and Legislation
Summary
The September 11 terrorist attacks by foreign nationals — including several
terrorists on student visas — have prompted a series of questions about foreign
students in the United States and the extent to which the U.S. government monitors
their admission and presence in this country. The arrival of letters on March 11,
2002, in which the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) notified a flight
school that two September 11 terrorists had been approved for foreign student visas
further heightened concerns about lax enforcement of immigration laws. Some
advocate closer scrutiny of foreign students entering and studying in the United
States, asserting that foreign students are the category of aliens most likely to include
spies and terrorists. Others warn that this emphasis on foreign students as a main
security and terrorist risk is misplaced and that such scrutiny may lead to excessive
government monitoring without reducing the risk of terrorism.
Potential foreign students, as well as all aliens, must satisfy Department of State
(DOS) consular officers abroad and immigration inspectors upon entry to the United
States that they are not ineligible for visas under the so-called “grounds for
inadmissibility” of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which include security and
terrorist concerns. The consular officers who process visa applicants are required to
check DOS’s automated lookout systems before issuing any visa. In FY2000, DOS
identified 181 potential nonimmigrants (i.e., foreign nationals coming temporarily)
as inadmissible because of security or terrorist concerns.
The three visa categories used by foreign students are: F visas for academic
study; M visas for vocational study; and J visas for cultural exchange. The numbers
admitted have more than doubled over the past 2 decades. In FY1979, the total
number of foreign student and cultural exchange visas issued by DOS consular
officers was 224,030 and comprised 4% of all nonimmigrant visas issued. In
FY2000, DOS issued 589,368 visas to F, J, and M nonimmigrants, making up 8% of
all nonimmigrant visas issued.
In 1996, Congress enacted a provision that established a foreign student
monitoring system and required educational institutions to participate as a condition
of continued approval to enroll foreign students. The USA Patriot Act (P.L. 107-56)
includes provisions to expand the foreign student tracking system and authorizes
appropriations for the foreign student monitoring system, which previously had been
funded through $95 fees paid by the foreign students. In May, the President signed
the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act (P.L. 107-173, H.R. 3525),
which increased the monitoring of foreign students and closed perceived loopholes.
P.L. 107-296, the law establishing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
transfers almost all of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) functions to
two new bureaus in DHS: the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services and
the Bureau of Border Security, with the latter charged with maintaining the foreign
student tracking system. Oversight of the monitoring system’s implementation may
come up in the 108th Congress.

---

Contents
Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Foreign Student Visas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
F Visa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
J Visa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
M Visa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Screening Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Trends and Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Monitoring Foreign Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Duration of Status Visa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Security Concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Reporting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Current Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Strengthening Background Checks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Accelerating SEVIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Expanding Reporting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Increasing Enforcement of Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Ensuring That INS Implements Laws and Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Legislation in 107th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
USA Patriot Act (P.L. 107-56) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Homeland Security Act (P.L. 107-296) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Other Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
List of Figures
Figure 1. Visas for F, J, and M Nonimmigrants Issued in FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Figure 2. Region of Origin for F, J and M Nonimmigrants, FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . 7
Figure 3. Academic Level of Foreign Students, 2000-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Figure 4. Major Fields of Study of Foreign Students, 2000-2001 . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

---

Foreign Students in the United States:
Policies and Legislation
Background
Since the Immigration Act of 1924, the United States has expressly permitted
foreign students to study in U.S. institutions. Most foreign students are at least 18
years old and are enrolled in higher education programs. If they attend public high
schools in the United States, the law requires that foreign students pay tuition, with
some exceptions. It also bars the admission of foreign students for the purpose of
attending public elementary schools. While foreign students are also barred from
receiving federal financial assistance, many are successful at gaining financial
assistance from the colleges and universities they attend.
Foreign students enrich the cultural diversity of the educational experience for
U.S. residents as well as enhancing the reputation of U.S. universities as world-class
institutions. While their presence is generally viewed as a positive one, concerns
have arisen in recent years that have caused Congress to take a new look at the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provisions that govern their admission. The
recent terrorist attacks conducted by foreign nationals — including several terrorists
on foreign student visas — are raising a series of questions about foreign students in
the United States, their rights and privileges, and the extent to which the U.S.
government monitors their presence in this country.
Foreign Student Visas
There are three main avenues for students from other countries to temporarily
come to the United States to study, and each involves admission as a nonimmigrant.
A nonimmigrant is an alien legally in the United States for a specific purpose and a
temporary period of time. There are more than 20 major nonimmigrant visa
categories, and they are commonly referred to by the letter that denotes their
subsection in the law.1 The three visa categories used by foreign students are: F
visas for academic study; M visas for vocational study; and J visas for cultural
exchange.
F Visa. The most common visa for foreign students is the F-1 visa. It is
tailored for international students pursuing a full-time academic education. The F-1
student is generally admitted as a nonimmigrant for the period of the program of
1 §101(a)(15) of INA.

---

CRS-2
study, referred to as the duration of status.2 The law requires that the student have
a foreign residence that they have no intention of abandoning. Their spouses and
children may accompany them as F-2 nonimmigrants.
To obtain an F-1 visa, prospective students also must demonstrate that they have
met several criteria:
! They must be accepted by a school that has been approved by the
Attorney General.3
! They must document that they have sufficient funds or have made
other arrangements to cover all of their expenses for 12 months.4
! They must demonstrate that they have the scholastic preparation to
pursue a full course of study for the academic level to which they
wish to be admitted and must have a sufficient knowledge of English
(or have made arrangements with the school for special tutoring, or
study in a language the student knows).
Once in the United States on an F visa, nonimmigrants are generally barred from
off-campus employment. Exceptions are for extreme financial hardship that arises
after arriving in the United States and for employment with an international
organization.5 F students are permitted to engage in on-campus employment if the
employment does not displace a U.S. resident. In addition, F students are permitted
to work in practical training that relates to their degree program, such as paid
research and teaching assistantships. An alien on an F visa who otherwise accepts
employment violates the terms of the visa and is subject to removal and other
penalties discussed later in this report.
J Visa. Foreign students are just one of many types of aliens who may enter
the United States on a J-1 visa, sometimes referred to as the Fulbright program.
Others admitted under this cultural exchange visa include scholars, professors,
teachers, trainees, specialists, foreign medical graduates, international visitors, au
pairs, and participants in student travel/work programs. Those seeking admission as
a J-1 nonimmigrant must be participating in a cultural exchange program that the
U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (BECA)6 has
2 Those entering as secondary school students are only admitted for 1 year.
3 Schools that wish to receive foreign students must file a petition with the INS district
director. The particular supporting documents for the petition depend on the nature of the
petitioning school. Once a school is approved it can continue to receive foreign students
without any time limits; however, the approval may be withdrawn if the INS discovers that
the school has failed to comply with the law or regulations.
4 F, J, and M students are barred from federal financial aid. See §484(a)(5) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, as amended.
5 The Immigration Act of 1990 created an F-1 pilot employment program, but authority for
this pilot off-campus work program expired September 30, 1996.
6 This bureau was formerly the United States Information Agency (USIA).

---

CRS-3
designated. They are admitted for the period of the program.7 Their spouses and
children may accompany them as J-2 nonimmigrants.
Responsible officers of the sponsoring organizations must be U.S. citizens. The
programs that wish to sponsor J visas also must satisfy the following criteria:
! be a bona fide educational and cultural exchange program, with
clearly defined purposes and objectives;
! have at least five exchange visitors annually;
! provide cross-cultural activities;
! be reciprocal whenever possible;
! if not sponsored by the government, have a minimum stay for
participants of at least 3 weeks (except for those designated as “short
term” scholars);
! provide information verifying the sponsoring program’s legal status,
citizenship, accreditation, and licensing;
! show that they are financially stable, able to meet the financial
commitments of the program, and have funds for the J
nonimmigrant’s return airfare;
! ensure that the program is not to fill staff vacancies or adversely
affect U.S. workers;
! assure that participants have accident insurance, including insurance
for medical evacuations; and,
! provide full details of the selection process, placement, evaluation,
and supervision of participants.8
As with F visas, those seeking J visas must have a foreign residence they have
no intention of abandoning. However, many of those with J visas have an additional
foreign residency requirement in that they must return abroad for 2 years if they wish
to adjust to any other nonimmigrant status or to become a legal permanent resident
in the United States. This foreign residency requirement applies to J nonimmigrants
who meet any of the three following conditions:
! An agency of the U.S. government or their home government
financed in whole or in part — directly or indirectly — their
participation in the program.
! The BECA designates their home country as clearly requiring the
services or skills in the field they are pursuing.
! They are coming to the United States to receive graduate medical
training.

There are very few exceptions to the foreign residency requirement for J visa holders
who meet any of these criteria — even J visa holders who marry U.S. citizens are
7 As with secondary students entering with F-1 visas, J-1 students in secondary school
programs are only admitted for up to 1 year.
8 22 CFR §514.

---

CRS-4
required to return home for 2 years.9 Although many aliens with J-1 visas are
permitted to work in the programs in which they are participating, the work
restrictions for foreign students with a J-1 visa are similar to those for the F visa.
M Visa. Foreign students who wish to pursue a non-academic, e.g., vocational,
course of study apply for an M visa. This visa is the least used of the foreign student
visas. Much as the F students, those seeking an M visa must show that they have
been accepted by an approved school, have the financial means to pay for tuition and
expenses and otherwise support themselves for 1 year, and have the scholastic
preparation and language skills appropriate for the course of study. Their spouses
and children may accompany them as M-2 nonimmigrants. As with all of the student
visa categories, they must have a foreign residence they have no intention of
abandoning. Those with M visas are also barred from working in the United States,
including in on-campus employment.
Screening Procedures. Potential foreign students, as well as all aliens,
must satisfy Department of State’s (DOS) consular officers abroad and INS
inspectors upon entry to the United States that they are not ineligible for visas under
the so-called “grounds for inadmissibility” of the INA. These criteria include
security and terrorist concerns as well as health-related grounds and criminal
history.10 Some provisions may be waived/overcome in the cases of nonimmigrants,
refugees, and certain other aliens. To become a nonimmigrant, aliens also must
demonstrate that they are not “intending immigrants,” i.e., wanting to reside
permanently in the United States.11
In terms of criminal and security and terrorist concerns, the consular officers
who process visa applicants are required to check DOS’s automated lookout systems
before issuing any visa; thus, the names of foreign students are run through various
databases, as are those of all other nonimmigrants seeking a visa to enter the United
States. In FY2000 (the most recent year for which complete data are available), DOS
identified 181 potential nonimmigrants (i.e., foreign nationals coming temporarily)
as inadmissible because of security or terrorist concerns.12 In comparison, DOS
9 INA §212(e) provides only a few exceptions, including cases of exceptional hardship to
the spouse or child of a J-1 if that spouse or child is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident
alien and in cases of persecution on the basis of race, religion, or political opinion if the
alien returned home, and if it is in the national interest not to require the return.
10 §212(a) of INA lists the grounds for inadmissibility categories as: health-related grounds;
criminal history; security and terrorist concerns; public charge (e.g., indigence); seeking to
work without proper labor certification; illegal entrants and immigration law violations;
lacking proper documents; ineligible for citizenship; and, aliens previously removed. For
more information, see CRS Report RS20916, Immigration and Naturalization
Fundamentals, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
11 For background and analysis of visa issuance policy and activities, see CRS Report
RL31512, Visa Issuances: Policy, Issues, and Legislation, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
12 The inadmissibility of members and supporters of foreign terrorist organizations can be
waived under §212(d), which provides the Attorney General with that authority, if he deems
that it is in the national interest to do so. Such waivers are usually granted at the request of
(continued...)

---

CRS-5
identified just over 3,200 potential nonimmigrants as inadmissible on criminal
grounds in FY2000.
The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 originally included a requirement
that all visa applicants be fingerprinted, with waivers for A visa (diplomats) and G
visa (representatives of international organizations) nonimmigrants.13 The statutory
requirement for fingerprinting nonimmigrants was repealed in 1986, but the Attorney
General still has the discretionary authority to require fingerprints of aliens applying
for nonimmigrant visas “for the purposes of identification and investigation.”14
Trends and Characteristics
Foreign students have been coming to study in the United States for almost a
century, and the numbers admitted have more than doubled over the past 2 decades.
In FY1979, the total number of F and J visas issued by DOS consular officers was
224,030 and comprised 4% of all nonimmigrant visas issued.15 In FY1989, the
number of F, M, and J visas had grown to 373,932, constituting 5% of all
nonimmigrant visas DOS issued. By FY2000, the most recent year data are
available, DOS had issued 589,368 visas to F, J, and M nonimmigrants, and these
categories made up 8% of all nonimmigrant visas issued. As Figure 1 illustrates, F
academic students lead with 308,944 visas issued in FY2000. The J cultural
exchange visitors followed with 273,959, and the M students trailed with only 6,465
visas issued in FY2000.
12 (...continued)
the Secretary of State, with the concurrence of the Attorney General.
13 Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, P.L. 82-414.
14 Immigration and Nationality Amendments of 1986, P.L. 99-653. See CRS Report
RL31570, Immigration: Alien Registration, by Andorra Bruno.
15 The M vias was not established until 1981 by P.L. 97-116.

---

CRS-6
Figure 1. Visas for F, J, and M Nonimmigrants Issued in FY2000
Thousands
350
308.944
300
273.959
250
200
150
100
50
6.465
0
Academic (F)
Cultural Exchange (J)
Vocational (M)
Students & Exchange Visitors
Family
Source: CRS presentation of U.S. Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs
data.
The largest sending regions of the world are Asia and Europe, as Figure 2
depicts. Although Asia had led with well over half of all student visas for many
years, the latest available data shows both Europe and Asia having 43.7% of the
589,368 visas issued to F, J and M nonimmigrants issued in 2000. African and Latin
American countries had comparable portions, 5.3% and 5.2% respectively. Canada
and Oceania combined are 2.1%.16
16 For analysis of foreign students data in the mid-1990s, see CRS Report 97-576,
Immigration: Foreign Students in the United States, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.

---

CRS-7
Figure 2. Region of Origin for F, J and M Nonimmigrants, FY2000
Asia
43.7%
Africa
5.3%
Latin America
5.2%
Canada/Oceania
2.1%
Europe
43.7%
Source: CRS presentation of U.S. Department of State Bureau of Consular Affairs
data on 589,368 nonimmigrants issued visas.
According to International Educational Exchange’s Open Doors survey of U.S.
colleges and universities, the largest group (47.6%) of foreign students enrolled in
1999-2000 were in undergraduate degree programs. As Figure 3 presents, almost an
equal portion (44.6%) were enrolled in graduate degree programs. Foreign students
enrolled in other programs (including practical training programs) comprised 7.8%.17
17 Trade schools, such as flight schools, generally do not participate in this privately-
conducted annual survey.

---

CRS-8
Figure 3. Academic Level of Foreign Students, 2000-2001
Undergraduate
47.6%
Other
7.8%
Graduate
44.6%
Source: CRS presentation of International Educational Exchange Open Doors
data on 547,867 students.
Figure 4. Major Fields of Study of Foreign Students, 2000-2001
Undeclared
Business
6.5%
19.4%
Other
17.2%
Intensive
English
Engineering
4.2%
15.2%
Social Sciences
7.7%
Fine & Applied Arts
Physical &
Life Sciences
6.2%
Health
7.0%
Math &
4.1% Computer Sciences
12.4%
Source: CRS presentation of International Educational Exchange Open Doors
data on 547,867 students.

---

CRS-9
The fields of study undertaken by foreign students appear to be quite diverse,
as Figure 4 shows. The largest category is business, which is the field of study of
only 19.4% of foreign students. Engineering along with mathematics and computer
sciences follow with 15.2% and 12.4%, respectively.
Monitoring Foreign Students
Duration of Status Visa. While most nonimmigrants are admitted with visas
that have a precise expiration date, foreign postsecondary students are admitted for
“duration of status,” which lasts as long as they are full-time students or participating
according to the terms of their exchange programs. It is difficult for INS to know
when foreign students have overstayed because the duration of status lacks a fixed
termination date and schools, although required to report students who stop
attending, have not been required until recently to systematically report data on the
progress of the foreign student (see below).
For many years previously, a foreign student was admitted for only 1 year and
had to renew the visa with INS each subsequent year for as long as the student was
enrolled. The INS then issued regulations in 1978 and 1981 allowing for visa
validity periods longer than 1 year. In regulations in 1983 and 1987 that were aimed
at “eliminating burdensome paperwork,” INS reduced the reporting requirements and
established the “duration of status” policy that remains in practice currently.18
Security Concerns. In 1995, INS began a review of the admission and
monitoring of foreign students. Impetus for the review came in part from former
Federal Bureau of Investigation Director Louis Freeh who expressed concern that
possible terrorists could use foreign student status as a way of entering the United
States.19 Those concerned with the security risks of the foreign student visa often
pointed out that one of the men convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center terrorist
bombing had entered the United States on a student visa, dropped out of school, and
yet stayed in the country.
Former INS Commissioner Doris Meisner emphasized plans to automate a
foreign student reporting and monitoring system when she testified before the Senate
Committee on the Judiciary’s Subcommittee on Immigration in 1995.20 INS had not
been maintaining the addresses of foreign students, and reviews of the reporting
system questioned the accuracy of the data.21 The National Commission on
18 Federal Register, v. 44, November 22, 1978. p. 54620; Federal Register, v. 46, January
23, 1981. p. 7267; Federal Register, v. 48, April 5, 1983. p. 14575; and, Federal Register,
v. 52, April 22, 1987. p. 13223.
19 For a discussion of Mr. Freeh’s memorandum, see: Interpreter Releases, v. 71, December
19, 1994.
20 U.S. Congress. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Examining Nonimmigrant
Immigration Issues. Senate Hearing 104-814, Serial No. J-104-48. Washington, September
28, 1995.
21 There have long been record keeping requirements for schools with foreign students,
(continued...)

---

CRS-10
Terrorism, a bi-partisan commission established by Congress, cited the vulnerability
of the foreign student visa in its June 2000 report, which recommended, among other
things, that the INS automated system to monitor foreign students be enhanced and
expanded.22 Reports of evidence that several of the terrorists involved in the
September 11 attacks entered the United States on foreign student visas has led many
others to echo the earlier calls for a better monitoring system.
Reporting Requirements. When Congress enacted the Illegal Immigration
Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996, it added statutory
language mandating that the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretaries
of State and Education, develop by January 1, 1998, a program to collect data on F,
J, and M nonimmigrants from at least five countries. By 2003, the data collection
must include all countries. This provision, §641 of IIRIRA, requires that INS collect
the following data elements:
! identity and address of the alien;
! nonimmigrant classification of the alien, date of visa issuance, and
any change or extension;
! academic status of the alien (e.g., full-time enrollment); and
! any disciplinary action taken by the school, college, or university as
a result of a crime committed by the alien.
INS is to collect the information electronically “where practical.” According to §641
of IIRIRA, educational institutions are required to report this information to INS as
a condition of continued approval to enroll foreign students.23
From June 1997 to October 1999, INS conducted the first pilot program known
as the Coordinated Interagency Partnership Regulating International Students
(CIPRIS) at 21 educational institutions in Georgia, Alabama, North Carolina, and
South Carolina, at Atlanta’s Hartsfield Airport, and at the INS Texas Service Center.
In July 2001, INS announced that the second phase of its foreign student monitoring
system, referred to as the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS),
would begin at 12 Boston area institutions in November 2001. At a recent hearing,
21 (...continued)
covering such information as name, address, country of citizenship, enrollment status, and
field of study. The regulations were revised in 1983 so that schools no longer had to report
changes in status directly to INS. Since 1983, schools have had 3 business days to respond
to requests for information about a foreign student. INS could bar schools that did not meet
record keeping requirements from enrolling foreign students. (8 CFR §214.3(g)(1))
22 National Commission on Terrorism. Countering the Changing Threat of International
Terrorism, June 5, 2000. For a discussion of this report, see CRS Report RS20598,
National Commission on Terrorism Report: Background and Issues for Congress, by
Raphael F. Perl.
23 The law also required, as of April 1, 1997, that the educational institutions collect a fee
(not to exceed $100) from each of the foreign students to remit to the Attorney General to
carry out the program. The 106th Congress amended this provision so that INS rather then
the institutions would collect the fee (P.L. 106-396).

---

CRS-11
INS stated that about 900 institutions are issuing and updating student records in
SEVIS.24
Prior to September 11, some university officials argued they would be turned
into an enforcement agent of INS and expressed concern that the confidentiality of
their student records would be compromised.25 Although educational institutions
stopped their calls to repeal §641 of IIRIRA after September 11 and now support a
tracking system, many educational institutions across the country are expressing
reservations about these new reporting requirements. They stated that the SEVIS is
burdensome and that INS is not providing training to staff who must use SEVIS.26
These concerns that INS will not have SEVIS fully operational by January 31, 2003
are consistent with the findings of the DOJ Inspector General’s evaluation of the
foreign student tracking program.27 INS issued final regulations, however, on
December 11, 2002, and has subsequently indicated SEVIS is operational for all
incoming students. INS has set a deadline of August 1, 2003 for schools to enter all
continuing foreign students into SEVIS.28
Current Issues
Some advocate a closer monitoring of aliens in the United States, particularly
those present on foreign student visas. Supporters of this view assert that foreign
students are the most likely class of nonimmigrants to include spies and terrorists,
and they argue that increased monitoring of aliens on F, J, and M visas is essential
to national security. Some suggest that there should be a moratorium on issuance of
new foreign student visas until these questions are addressed. Others warn that this
emphasis on foreign students as a major security and terrorist risk is misplaced and
that such scrutiny may lead to excessive government monitoring without reducing the
risk of terrorism. Many also question the feasibility of systems for nonimmigrant
tracking, citing the work that remains on the reporting system for foreign students.
A variety of options have been raised, and several of the major issues sparked by
these options are discussed below.
24 U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. Hearing on the INS’s Implementation of the
Foreign Student Tracking Program, statement of Janis Sposato, INS Immigration Services
Division, September 18, 2002. For hearing testimony, see
[http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm].
25 Interpreter Releases, v. 74, March 17, 1997.
26 U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. Hearing on the INS’s Implementation of the
Foreign Student Tracking Program, statement of Terry W. Hartle, American Council on
Education, September 18, 2002. For hearing testimony, see
[http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm].
27 U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims, Hearing on the INS’s Implementation of the
Foreign Student Tracking Program, statement of Glenn A. Fine, DOJ Inspector General,
September 18, 2002. For testimony, see [http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm].
28 Federal Register, v. 67, no. 238, Dec. 11, 2002, p. 76256-76280.

---

CRS-12
Strengthening Background Checks. Some suggest that the policy of
fingerprinting foreign students as a condition of their admission be reinstated. Others
are exploring whether more advanced biometric identifiers should be used to screen
foreign students to ascertain that they are indeed who they say they are and that they
are not inadmissible to the United States. Proponents of enhanced screening assert
that once these fingerprints or biometric identifiers are stored in an automated
database, it can be continuously updated as new intelligence and law enforcement
data become available to identify potentially deportable aliens already in the United
States as well as exclude inadmissible aliens from entering. Those who oppose
strengthening background checks for foreign students focus less on the principle and
more on the feasibility. Opponents refer to the assessments made 20 years ago that
the fingerprinting requirements were burdensome and time consuming. They
speculate that the costs of putting in place a modern system with biometric identifiers
would be significant. They also cite the diplomatic complications that could arise
under reciprocity when U.S. citizens seek to travel to other nations.
Accelerating SEVIS. Some maintain that waiting until 2003 to have SEVIS
fully operational nationwide is not acceptable given the current security threats, and
that admission of foreign students should be curtailed until SEVIS is fully
operational. They argue that INS must accelerate the implementation of the foreign
student monitoring system, and some are advocating additional funding for INS to
do so. For FY2002, Congress appropriated $36.8 million to get SEVIS up and
running by January 1, 2003. While opposition to SEVIS has all but disappeared,
some caution that its usefulness in detecting terrorist or security risks is quite limited
and that too much emphasis on its implementation may pull needed INS resources
from other important priorities.
Expanding Reporting Requirements. Some advocate more frequent
reporting requirements so that foreign students who drop out or do not show up
would be tagged in the monitoring system more quickly. Currently, §641 does not
specify how often educational institutions must report the status of foreign students,
and some fear that, as a result, the timeliness of the data is problematic. Adding
additional data elements to help identify student who may fit a risk profile, some
maintain, should also be considered. Others express concern that expanding the
reporting requirements would slow the implementation and may also result in a
system so complex that it is less feasible. Still others assert that the reporting
responsibility should shift from the educational institution back to the foreign
student, making them once again report to INS annually Opponents of this option
argue that adding almost one-half million foreign student visa renewals to the
workload of INS, an agency that already has millions of petitions pending, would be
impractical and may make it even more cumbersome to identify security risks. Some
suggest that home countries should play a more responsible role in monitoring the
students sent to the United States, perhaps adding trigger mechanisms that would
restrict admissions from countries whose students are more likely to violate the terms
of their visas.
Increasing Enforcement of Schools. It appears that some schools,
notably flight schools as reported by the media, have been admitting foreign nationals
who lack proper visas to study in the United States, i.e., an F, J, or M visa. Those
who argue further legislation is not necessary point out that such practices violate

---

CRS-13
immigration law, placing the foreign national at risk of deportation as well as placing
the educational institution at risk of losing federal approval to enroll foreign students.
Supporters of increased enforcement assert that closer monitoring and stricter
penalties for schools that violate the law are needed to ensure that lax practices are
stopped. Most proponents of increased enforcement would target vocational schools,
especially flight schools, and intensive English language schools because of
migration patterns reportedly followed by the foreign nationals involved in the
September 11 attack.
Ensuring That INS Implements Laws and Policies. The arrival of
letters on March 11, 2002, in which the INS notified a flight school that two of the
September 11 terrorists — Mohammad Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi — had been
approved for foreign student visas called into question INS’s ability to carry out its
laws and policies. As it turns out, INS had actually approved the student visas for
Atta and Al-Shehhi on July 17, 2001 and August 9, 2001, respectively. While neither
INS nor DOS reportedly had any information at that time that would have indicated
that the two men might be terrorists, it does appear that Atta might have been
inadmissible on grounds of violating other provisions in INA when he re-entered the
United States in January 2001.29 Many argue that INS does not have sufficient
personnel dedicated to implementing the foreign student tracking program, to
reviewing the educational institutions for compliance, and to analyzing the SEVIS
to detect fraud.30
Legislation in 107th Congress
USA Patriot Act (P.L. 107-56). The USA Patriot Act, which passed the
House on October 24 and the Senate on October 25 and was signed by the President
on October 26, 2001, includes provisions to expand the foreign student tracking
system and authorizes $36 million in appropriations for the foreign student
monitoring system, which had been funded through $95 fees paid by the foreign
students. It also requires INS to have the foreign student tracking system established
by §641 of IIRIRA fully operational by January 1, 2003.
Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act. On December
19, 2001, the House passed the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform
Act of 2001 (H.R. 3525), sponsored by Representative F. James Sensenbrenner,
Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. This bill was nearly identical to a
bipartisan Senate bill (S. 1749, also titled the Enhanced Border Security and Visa
Entry Reform Act of 2001) that incorporated key provisions from two other border
security and visa entry reform bills — S. 1627 (Feinstein-Kyl) and S. 1618
29 U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on the Judiciary. The INS’s March
2002 Notification of the Approval of Pilot Training Status for Terrorist Hijackers
Mohammed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi. Washington, March 19, 2002. For hearing
testimony, see [http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm].
30 U.S. House of Representatives. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on
Immigration, Border Security, and Claims. Hearing on the INS’s Implementation of the
Foreign Student Tracking Program, statement of Glenn A. Fine, DOJ Inspector General,
September 18, 2002. For testimony, see [http://www.house.gov/judiciary/immigration.htm].

---

CRS-14
(Kennedy-Brownback). The Senate passed H.R. 3525 on April 18, 2002. The
President signed P.L. 107-173 on May 14, 2002.
Among the many provisions of P.L. 107-173 aimed at visa issuance reform are
provisions that close perceived loopholes in the admission of foreign students.
Specifically, Title V of P.L. 107-173 establishes electronic means to monitor and
verify:
! documentation of acceptance of student by approved school or
designated exchange program;
! transmittal of documentation to DOS;
! issuance of nonimmigrant visa to student or exchange visitor;
! admission of student or exchange visitor to the U.S.;
! notice to school or exchange program that nonimmigrant has been
admitted to the U.S.;
! registration and enrollment of nonimmigrant in school or exchange
program; and
! any other relevant act by the nonimmigrant, including changing
schools or programs.
The act also requires creation (within 120 days of enactment) of a transitional
program until the monitoring system is fully implemented. The transitional program
restricts issuance of a F, J, or M visa unless DOS has received electronic evidence
from an approved institution that alien is accepted and the consular officer has
adequately reviewed the applicant’s record. It additionally requires DOS to transmit
to INS that the alien has been issued a visa and, in turn, INS to notify the approved
institution that the alien has been admitted to the U.S. and, within 30 days of
registration deadline, the institution to notify INS if the alien fails to enroll.
Homeland Security Act (P.L. 107-296). The law establishing the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) transfers almost all of the Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) functions to two new bureaus in DHS: the Bureau of
Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Bureau of Border Security. The later
bureau is charged with maintaining the foreign student tracking system, but the
Bureau of Consular Affairs in DOS will continue its role in issuing foreign student
visas.
Other Legislation. Many of the bills aimed at thwarting terrorism contained
provisions regarding foreign students. They ranged in scope from tightening up the
monitoring of foreign students under current law to establishing a temporary
moratorium on the admission of foreign students until national security concerns are
addressed. The following bills are not an exhaustive list, but cover those that have
foreign students as the primary focus:
! H.R. 3002, introduced by Representative John Sweeney, would have
required the establishment of the foreign student monitoring system
within 180 days of enactment. H.R. 3002 stipulated that if INS and
DOS cannot meet this deadline, priority should be given to tracking
students from countries listed as aiding terrorism or those countries
the Attorney General deems as a national security risk.

---

CRS-15
! Representative Betty McCullom introduced H.R. 3033, which would
have authorized appropriations (such sums as may be necessary) for
the foreign student monitoring system.
! S. 1518/H.R. 3077 would have expanded the foreign student
tracking system to include information on immediate family
members who are accompanying the student. These companion bills
introduced by Senator Kit Bond and Representative Mike Castle
would have required the school to inform the Attorney General
within 30 days if a student fails to attend the institution and would
have instructed the Attorney General to add an alien’s failure to
attend school to the National Crime Information Center’s Interstate
Identification Index.
! Representative Peter Deutsch introduced legislation (H.R. 2988) that
would have regulated flight schools. H.R. 2988 would, among other
things, have required flight schools to obtain a set of fingerprints and
proof of identity for all students and to verify that all noncitizens
who are enrolled are lawfully admitted as nonimmigrants. The bill
would have established civil penalties for violations, with the
amounts escalating from $3,000 to $7,000 per violation.
! Senator Olympia Snowe introduced S. 1455, which would have
amended federal aviation law to prohibit a person from providing
training in the operation of any jet-propelled aircraft to any alien
within the United States unless the Attorney General certified to
such person that a background investigation of such alien has been
completed.
! Representative Michael Bilirakis introduced H.R. 3181, which
would have established a temporary moratorium on the issuance of
visas for nonimmigrant foreign students and other exchange program
participants and would have reformed procedures for issuance of
nonimmigrant student visas and for admission at ports of entry to the
United States.
! Representative Marge Roukema introduced H.R. 322, which would
have established a temporary moratorium on the issuance of visas
for nonimmigrant foreign students and other exchange program
participants and would have expanded reporting requirements for
universities under the foreign student monitoring program.
! H.R. 3515, introduced by Representative George Miller, would have
added provisions aimed at ensuring that aliens studying in the United
States comply with the terms and conditions applicable to such
study.

---