The 2008 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule allowing certain F-1 visa students with Science, Technology, Engineering or Math (STEM) degrees to extend their stay for an additional 17 months of training related to their degrees in the U.S. is deficient, a federal judge for the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has held. The judge concluded the DHS rule was not properly subjected to public notice and comment. However, the judge permitted the rule to remain temporarily in effect. Washington Alliance of Technology Workers v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, No. 1:14-cv-00529 (D. D.C. Aug. 12, 2015).

F-1 student visa holders are eligible to extend their visa status to work in the U.S. for up to 12 months following their graduation. Their employment during that time, known as optional practical training (OPT), must be related to their field of study. Prior to 2008, after the expiration of their OPT, such visa holders, regardless of their academic field, had to change to some other nonimmigrant visa status to work and remain in the U.S. If not, they would have to depart the U.S. after the expiration of their post-F-1 grace period.

The DHS STEM extension in this case allowed F-1 student visa holders who had earned STEM degrees to extend their OPT in their STEM field for an additional 17 months. The STEM extension has been useful and popular both for F-1 student visa holders and their employers, and employers have utilized the extension to further train and hire such foreign nationals and to evaluate these trainees and plan for possible sponsorship of nonimmigrant visa status and permanent employment.

Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), federal agencies must provide notice to the public of any proposed rulemaking and give them the opportunity for comment prior to the rule becoming effective. An agency is exempt from the notice-and-comment period only if it can establish that an emergency excused it \ from complying with the procedural requirements. In concluding the rule was procedurally deficient, the judge found the emergency exemption did not apply to the STEM extension rule.

The judge did not immediately vacate the rule, however, acknowledging that this would be “seriously disruptive” to those taking advantage of the extension. She stayed the vacatur until February 12, 2016, giving DHS time to submit the STEM extension rule to the notice-and-comment period as required by the APA.

Individuals currently employed pursuant to a STEM extension still maintain valid employment authorization. Assuming DHS initiates the notice-and-comment period for the STEM extension rule, as the judge concluded it should have done, there should be no long-term impact on STEM employees or their employers.

Jackson Lewis will provide comment, guidance, and updates as events warrant. Employers of STEM employees should contact their Jackson Lewis immigration attorneys with any questions regarding these developments.

Print:
EmailTweetLikeLinkedIn
Photo of Forrest G. Read IV Forrest G. Read IV

Forrest Read is a Principal in the Raleigh, North Carolina, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He has extensive experience in both business immigration law and employment law and has particular focus in legal issues in graduate medical education (GME).

Mr. Read’s immigration practice…

Forrest Read is a Principal in the Raleigh, North Carolina, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He has extensive experience in both business immigration law and employment law and has particular focus in legal issues in graduate medical education (GME).

Mr. Read’s immigration practice focuses on assisting employers in obtaining employment-based nonimmigrant visas (e.g., H-1B, L, O, TN) for foreign national employees and work-related immigrant (green card) visas, including PERM Labor Certifications, and advising employers on compliance with U.S. immigration laws and regulations. He has broad experience in advising large, mid-size and small employers on their various immigration needs and developing strategies to help them navigate through complex immigration issues. He also has particular experience in counseling employers in the health care industry and addressing immigration-related issues that arise for their broad range of health care professional employees (including advising on and obtaining employment authorization for medical residents and fellows and obtaining J-1 visa waivers for foreign national physicians completing their medical training in the United States). His immigration practice also includes defending employers in connection with Department of Labor H-1B and H-2B investigations.

Mr. Read’s employment law experience includes representing management, particularly academic medical centers in the GME context, in a wide array of workplace disputes and litigation before federal and state courts and administrative agencies, including matters related to discrimination, retaliation, harassment, disability, family and medical leave, various wage and hour issues, contracts, and intentional torts. He advises academic medical centers on the interplay between applicable academic law and employment law and the ramifications of what are divergent legal requirements and standards. Mr. Read also provides counsel with respect to the legal impact of competency standards for residents and trainees in GME, including situations involving discipline, remediation, and dismissal. He provides advice and guidance in the peer review process, including provision of verification and assessment of training in response to third party inquiries.

As a member of the Firm’s Corporate Diversity Counseling group, Mr. Read also has experience in providing assessments and making recommendations to corporate and institutional clients with respect to diversity and inclusion policies and initiatives, conducting related internal investigations, and shaping, developing and enforcing effective policies and initiatives to ensure consistency with client values and in furtherance of business goals and objectives.