The government had already introduced certain requirements to monitor the activity in social networksbut mainly focused on students who already had a visa and participated in the Protective protests made in various universities of USA against the Israeli offensive in Loop.
Pause is temporary and only applies to new visa interviews. The already scheduled visa interviews will be carried out.
Commerce talked about it with Ysabel LonazcoPeruvian lawyer graduated in Peru and the United States and specialized in migratory issues. She resides in Utah, where she directs the firm of Lonazco Law Lawyers, focused on the right of immigration. In the conversation explains the scope of the last measure, how the students For the review of their social networksand the consequences that Trump’s aggressive policy can have in relation to foreign students and universities.
The Peruvian lawyer Ysabel Lonazco.
– What legal basis is using the US government to pause student visas interviews in order to review their social networks?
The Secretary of State Marco Rubio It was the one who issued the directive that pauses the interviews of student visas. The legal basis is based on the authority of the State Department to establish visa selection procedures under the Immigration and Nationality Law (INA)specifically the sections that allow examining the national security and eligibility of applicants.
– To what extent is this social media review compatible with the privacy rights of international applicants?
International applicants for Visa have limited protections Under the US Constitution in 2019, there was a lawsuit against the Government alleging violation of the first amendment due to the requirement to register social networks in visa applications; However, that demand was dismissed by a procedure error and not in the background. The US government collects this information, which is supposed to be confidential, under a section of the Title 8 of the United States Codewhich regulates immigration and nationality issues. However, the State Department keeps this information in a database and shares this with other federal agencies. The reason why this information is retained is to enforce immigration laws, a responsibility that does not end after the visa. The United States Supreme Court determined in Trump vs. Hawaii (2018)that the admission and exclusion of foreigners is a “fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by the government’s political departments, largely immune to judicial control.” Thus, based on legal precedent and current legislation, this social media review is aligned with the power of the Executive to determine if the people who will be admitted are not a danger to national security. In the cable issued on March 25, 2025, the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, sent this directive to the consular offices, the approach of that directive is to detect people who present a danger to public security. This determination, according to the directive, can be given through the review of social networks.
– What criteria or indicators use immigration authorities to evaluate the social networks content of visa candidates, is it known for example what type of publications are prohibited?
Officers review profiles for signs of criminal or terrorist activity. Although specific criteria are not public, they generally seek content related to terrorism or extremism, criminal activities, contradictory information with the application and links with prohibited organizations.
Students, researchers and protesters of the UCLA are demonstrated during the protest against the Trump administration’s fund cuts to research, health and higher education. (Photo by Robyn Beck / AFP).
/
– From your experience, does this policy represent a legitimate security tool or an undercover exclusion mechanism?
The United States Supreme Court has previously determined that the admission and exclusion of foreigners is a fundamental sovereign attribute exercised by government political departments. The legitimacy of the Government’s power to generate guidelines for admission to the United States has already been determined by said Court. Definitely, this measure generates questions about what is behind, or if it is an excuse to exclude the entry of foreigners without any basis.
– Have you had cases of students whose processes have been delayed or denied by publications in social networks?
To date, I have not known international students with denied visas due to their publications on social networks. However, under a provision of the US Immigration and Nationality Law, the Consular Officer can deny the visa if he thinks he does not comply with the standards of this. That is, it is something generic, the officer will rarely expand on the specific reason, the arrangement is a generic clause.
– In addition to this measure, what other relevant restrictions imposed the Trump administration that directly affected foreign students?
Currently, international students have been subjected to greater scrutiny, especially those perceived as Hamas supporters or who have expressed pro-palestinian positions. The recent temporary suspension of appointments for international students (F-1) visas by the State Department has generated considerable uncertainty and concern among candidates to study in the United States.
Harvard student, Rae Trainer, speaks with her classmates Avinashi Bhandari and Victor Flores, during a demonstration for freedom in support of international students. (Photo by Rick Friedman / AFP).
/
– What legal risks are in international students if they omit information about their networks or if their publications are misunderstood?
Applicants to enter the United States are subject to visa denials under the United States immigration and nationality law in case they omit information about their social networks. Unfortunately, the misinterpretation of networks is inevitable, so it is necessary to review social networks in depth.
– How can visa applicants legally prepare before this type of digital scrutiny?
Visas candidates must thoroughly review all their social media accounts and consult with specialized immigration lawyers.
– From a legal perspective, what long -term consequences could this digital surveillance trend have on the US immigration system?
This trend could create a limitation on free expression, reduce US competitiveness for international students, establish precedents for greater digital surveillance, impact diversity in US educational institutions. The appointment break for international students will last “until more orientations are issued”, so it is crucial to stay updated on the developments of this evolutionary policy.
