Trump’s travel restrictions trouble Kent’s international students
Ayham Abuzeid, a Syrian, teaches English at Kent State. His country is banned.
Zainab Alshareef, a Saudi-Arabian, studies teaching English as a second language at Kent. Her country is not banned.
Abdulkarim Sekta, a Libyan, plans to begin a doctorate next fall at Kent. His country is banned.
Some international students at Kent State feel inhibited by the current travel restrictions, concerned that if they go home, getting back to the U.S. might not be guaranteed.
President Trump’s new travel order, which was planned to be instituted on October 18, changed his original travel restrictions. The new order took Sudan off the list, and added Chad, North Korea and Venezuela. The list now includes eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Syria, Venezuela and Yemen.
But a day before the restrictions would be instituted, a judge in Hawaii stopped it, calling it discriminatory.
Making America Safe is my number one priority. We will not admit those into our country we cannot safely vet.https://t.co/KJ886okyfC
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 24, 2017
Michael Taylor, marketing and communications specialist at Kent’s Office of Global Education, believes the travel ban exacerbated Kent’s already unstable international enrollment numbers, but wasn’t the cause. Currently, international enrollment at Kent has diminished.
“Puerto Rico got hit by one hurricane, and then another one came along a couple weeks later,” Taylor said. “That’s kinda how we feel—we keep getting hit with these sort of things.”
Taylor explained that for the top three “sender” countries where Kent attracts the most international students, conditions were already not favorable. More confidence in domestic universities in China, oil price drops in Saudi Arabia and tightened restrictions (because of visa abuse) for India were contributing to decreased international student numbers.
Taylor gave an example of 385 students from India who are currently enrolled, but more than 1,000 were enrolled in the spring of 2016. This decrease was not connected to Trump’s bans.
There are 2,146 international students at Kent, covering 104 countries, which is about 10 percent of student population. The number of international students decreased by 767 this year. Interestingly, the computer science major, a popular major for foreign students, dropped significantly in international enrollment at the main campus (223 students to 145 students).
After the first ban, a report surfaced saying $700 million each year may be lost by colleges if a permanent ban is instituted, as said in a Fortune article.
Students at Kent from the banned countries made up a very small minority in the Fall of 2017.
Current students have adjusted to the restrictions, and Taylor doesn’t think it is influencing their daily concerns.
“It’s something that’s probably in the back of their mind, but they’re not seeing it right now as a hindrance to their education,” he said. “Actually, students have been pretty level-headed about it.”
Recruitment is suffering though, and Taylor said that uncertainty is the biggest deterrent for internationals considering college in the U.S. “What has happened is that we’ve got additional competition from other English-speaking countries,” he said. “For instance, Canada, who [is] saying, ‘Look at our immigration policies: We’re an open country—you can come here.’”
Two and a half years have gone by without Abdulkarim Sekta visiting his family. “We wish if we can have a multi-entry visa so we can go back and visit,” the Libyan said.
Taylor explained that it would be harder to get a visa under the restrictions, but if an international person already has a visa, they can still travel. Carol Crimi of Kent’s Student Legal Services likewise said that immediate relatives of a person already in the U.S. can still visit.
“If [the student’s] visa’s revoked, the University is required to basically expel them, and require them to leave within 14 days,” the attorney said. “We are advising any students that we know from those countries not to return home.”
As far as refugees go, Crimi thinks the vetting process is thorough enough. “They go through a tremendous amount of screening before they’re granted the status.”
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders differs in her view of the thoroughness of the vetting process and the purpose of the travel ban.
“The entry restrictions in the proclamation apply to countries based on their inability or unwillingness to share critical information necessary to safely vet applications, as well as a threat assessment related to terrorism, instability, and other grave national security concerns,” Sanders stated, according to a CNN article.
Crimi finds the Supreme Court’s decision that the president has the jurisdiction to issue orders for purposes of national security correct, even though she is not a fan of the travel ban.
Christopher Banks, a Kent political science professor and legal expert, tends to think the ban is unconstitutional. He said that the ban dramatically affects universities.
Hans von Spakovsky, writing in a Heritage Foundation article, has a different view. “The basic legal flaw in all of this is that foreign aliens, whether they have family in the U.S. or not, have no constitutional right to enter the country. Neither universities, employers, nor other institutions have any constitutional right to recruit foreign aliens for jobs or positions except to the extent that Congress, which has plenary power over immigration, allows them to do so,” Spakovsky wrote.
Daniel Chand, assistant political science professor at Kent, said the travel ban does nothing. He said “simple-minded people like Trump” don’t understand nuances of immigration.
Indeed, restrictions for students versus visitors are complicated, and calling President Trump’s policy a travel “ban” is a simplified version of reality. The policy could be more accurately described as “travel restrictions.” According to Inside Higher Ed, some international students can still travel under the third version of the policy.
But Ayham Abuzeid, a large map of the U.S. hanging on the wall behind him, mentioned not feeling free to attend conferences. “If I wanted to go to a conference in Canada—I want to go somewhere in Mexico, in Europe—for couple of months before things changed a little bit, I would not have traveled,” the Syrian said, his hands motioning in front of an orange and white-striped sweater. “My wife is American. My daughter by default is American. We live here. So just like all of a sudden to be told, ‘Hey, if you leave the country, you’re not going be able to come back.’ This is my work. My daughter goes to school. My wife is working here.”
“I’m contributing to the American society,” the doctoral student said. “I’m a taxpayer. I have very clean record in my life. I’m a good citizen. But when this happened, it brushed everybody, you know, across the board.”
Abdulkarim Sekta from Libya earned a masters from Kent. The 29-year-old said that Libya, as well as the U.S., should work to make the travel process efficient.
“The Libyans should cooperate, and also the Americans should make it easy for those like myself who have been here, who don’t have any [criminal] records, who came here for a purpose to facilitate and pave the way for them,” he said, his beige suit coat reaching to touch a large, shiny watch. “I worked here for Cleveland Clinic—I worked for the American people.”
For those that the U.S. trusts enough to come into the country, Sekta said that multiple-entry visas would be useful. Some restrictions for people wanting to come to the U.S., who aren’t cleared by a background check, should be instituted as well, he said.
“We used to do the same thing in Libya when people came from Chad, from African countries,” he said, firm that a country has the right to restrict entry. “People at that time were not terrorists, but they used to carry some diseases, so Libyans stopped them from coming as refugees for a while.”
Zainab Alshareef from Saudi-Arabia sat in a dull red chair, her still-moist hair just touching her shoulders.“There is no Saudi Arabia whatsoever,” the Kent student said with a laugh as she looked at the list of banned countries. “That’s the funny part.”
Taylor at the Office of Global Education said Kent is planning to target South America and Southeast Asia (specifically Vietnam) to make up for lost numbers. He remains hopeful that international student numbers will rebound. Word of mouth is often effective, and Taylor likes to tell stories of friends and relatives who attend Kent, like a mother and daughter from Turkestan, seven friends from Nepal and four brothers from Saudi Arabia. “International students just like being here,” he said.
Zainab Alshareef followed two brothers and a sister who studied in the U.S. before her. One of 10 children, the teaching English as a second language student traveled once to a part of Detroit, Michigan heavily occupied by Saudis. A strange experience, she thought, to be in America, and yet feel in Saudi Arabia.
“I will not want to live there. It was so depressing for some reason. I don’t know why. Maybe because it’s America with another thing,” she said. “Okay, I’ll come here, eat, get, like, the good food, and then go back to Kent. I love it here.”
#JMCRPP Trump’s travel ban gets Kent college students talking. Read here https://t.co/vBBv8oCbjU
— Sam Madison (@SamMadison20) December 3, 2017
#JMCRPP International student enrollment is down at Kent State. Read here https://t.co/vBBv8oCbjU
— Sam Madison (@SamMadison20) December 3, 2017
