US to Foreign Students: Get Public on Social Media or Risk Visa Rejection

In a step that has raised alarm worldwide, the US Embassy in India instructed all F, M, and J non-immigrant visa seekers—long working on behalf of exchange students in academia, vocational training, and culture—to make their social media accounts public, "effective immediately." The instruction, which covers sites such as Facebook, Instagram, X, LinkedIn, YouTube, and TikTok, is a significant ramp-up on online surveillance under the Trump administration's immigration policy.

Though portrayed as a national security action, the move is criticized for singling out student voices, particularly foreign students who have newly become involved in protests, such as Palestinian rights protests on American campuses. These protests, involving foreign students' participation, seem to have given wings to the administration's push to deepen monitoring of political alignments and sentiments.

All visa decisions are issues of national security," the US Embassy stated. But to many thousands of young potential students who are getting ready to study in the US this fall, this now translates to making their individual online lives a matter of public records—or facing rejection.

The US State Department previously maintained that consular authorities will screen out blog posts that could express "anti-American sentiment" or any membership with proscribed groups. But such a subjective measure threatens to disenfranchise students based on harmless political views, cultural expression, or even satires—stretching the borders of free speech.

It's a high-stakes game. The majority of students, especially Indians and those from the Middle East, are no longer sure how much of their past online behavior can be used against them. Will disagreement with US foreign policy be a red flag? And what about silence—will students who have no social media presence be considered suspicious?

Though proponents of the policy refer to national interest, privacy advocates are cautioning that it has the potential to institutionalize view-point discrimination, particularly towards residents from politically vulnerable areas. Lawyers are also fighting over whether it constitutes a breach of First Amendment principles, particularly towards foreign students when they set foot on US soil.

There are more than 15% more foreign students at almost 200 American institutions, generating billions of dollars and foreign talent. That legacy can be jeopardized—by making a dream destination a virtual self-censorship zone.