Harvard Lobbied on Trump’s Visa Cap as Federal Lobbying Spending Dips to $200,000

Harvard lobbied on a congressional resolution that would overturn the federal rule imposing a four-year cap on visas for students and visiting scholars, according to federal lobbying disclosures released Monday.

The University spent a total of $200,000 on federal lobbying in the third quarter of 2026, though the filing does not specify if the University lobbied for or against the resolution. A federal judge temporarily blocked the rule one day before it was set to go into effect in September but denied a request for summary judgment without prejudice, leaving the final legal challenge in limbo.

Harvard’s spending this quarter dropped slightly from the $210,000 it posted in the second quarter of 2026, and it is a about 9 percent decrease from the same period last year. It is also the first quarter since Harvard ended its decades-long retainer with O’Neill Athy and Casey, a boutique Washington, D.C. lobbying firm that had represented the University since at least 1999.

The resolution, if passed, would block the cap, which places a fixed limit of up to four years on F and J visas — a shorter period than the typical length of many Ph.D. programs. Under the previous system, international students were generally allowed to remain in the United States for the duration of their academic programs.

The rule would also require students who wish to remain in the country beyond the four-year limit to file for an extension with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. They could previously update their status directly through their universities.

The Harvard International Office told students in a July email that the cap would have a “significant impact” on Harvard’s international students, but added it would not have an immediate impact on their visa statuses. The HIO also urged J-1 scholars and F-1 and J-1 students enrolled in on-campus programs to try to be in the U.S. when the rule took effect.

Harvard President Alan M. Garber ’76 has also addressed the rule, calling it “odd” in a July interview at the Economic Club of Washington and noting that “a typical Ph.D. program usually takes at least six years.”

A coalition of higher education groups and labor unions have also filed a lawsuit seeking a preliminary injunction that would block the rule while the lawsuit proceeds, though it has not yet been granted. Harvard is a member of two plaintiff organizations: the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration and the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts.

Harvard also paid $90,000 to Ballard Partners, a lobbying firm closely tied to the Trump administration, the same amount it paid in previous quarters. The University hired Ballard days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration in 2025.

The disclosure named Brian Ballard, ​​Daniel McFaul, and ​Michael LaRosa as the Ballard lobbyists assigned to Harvard’s case. LaRosa, former press secretary to former first lady Jill Biden and a former ABC News political contributor, was not named in the disclosure last quarter despite being included in previous periods.

Harvard also lobbied on two new bills. One bill, introduced in September, would amend the tax code to clarify due process rights when the Internal Revenue Service moves to revoke an organization’s tax-exempt status. Another September bill in the disclosure would add legal hurdles before the IRS could audit universities over their tax-exempt status.

The Department of the Treasury and the IRS proposed regulations in September that would revoke tax-exempt status from educational institutions that were found to be violating discrimination rules in admissions and school programs. The rules would grant leverage to the federal government over private schools that it claims may be violating the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling that banned race-conscious admissions.

The Department of Justice filed a February lawsuit against Harvard, seeking its admissions records as part of a review into whether the University complied with federal civil rights law.

Harvard has also spiked its legal spending, shelling out approximately $210 million in fiscal year 2026 — a roughly 70 percent jump from the previous year. The cost reflects a new federal relations strategy for the University, which has expanded its roster of D.C. law firms to more than a dozen.

The University cited the increased legal fees as a factor in its modest margin of 1.5 percent, attributing it to “elevated legal costs along with other pressures that show little sign of abating” in the annual financial report released Thursday.

—Staff writer Megan L. Blonigen can be reached at [email protected] and on Signal at mblon.50. Follow her on X at @MeganBlonigen.