Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 293 posts

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#61

Post by epicureanideal »

mschuster91 wrote: post #45
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

> How do we get past this? Reform the entire election system: - 4 year term length for House elections instead of 2 so that representatives can get stuff done instead of having to spend every second year in election campaigns - reform campaign financing to a government funded model like in Germany (and entirely ban PACs) so that the influence of big money on government is eliminated - if possible, get rid of the Pres…

Some would say having Presidents without a legislative majority and a legislative majority without a President is a feature, not a bug.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#62

Post by magicalist »

lowmemcpu wrote: post #56
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

Taking a look at all the agency websites under the Executive branch gives a pretty incredible overview of how out-of-control it's gotten [1]. And the number of czars have been growing [2] under both Obama and Trump (though I guess this administration doesn't use that title) [1] https://www.loc.gov/rr/news/fedgov.html [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._executive_branch_...

> And the number of czars have been growing [2] under both Obama and Trump (though I guess this administration doesn't use that title)

That list is "executive branch officials who have been described by the media as a czar of some kind", not anything official or affecting the duties of that person in any particular way.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#63

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st »

alexfromapex wrote: post #44
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

Banning lobbying which is going to be a difficult battle for sure

Why do you think lobbying had anything to do with this?

I interpreted this as mostly driven by the nativism of Trump et al.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#64

Post by oh_sigh »

amerine wrote: post #26
mariodiana wrote: post #23

I'm not a lawyer, but how is it Harvard and MIT had standing in court for this case?

Why wouldn’t they? Your question doesn’t make sense to me

You can't just sue because you are displeased with something - you need to have suffered, or will suffer direct harm from the thing(this is called locus standi). I'm guessing OP is saying that Harvard/MIT would not be harmed from this, only the students would be harmed(so they would need to be the ones to sue, not the college).

It kind of makes sense - if everything is online courses, it doesn't matter to Harvard whether the students are at an apartment in Cambridge St or in the middle of the Mongolian steppe, as long as you have internet access.

On the other hand, if students are deciding to attend some other university(say, one in their home country) and Harvard can show that harms them, then they would have standing

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#65

Post by yingw787 »

Yeah this isn't a viable way to formulate public policy. It isn't new either, happened with the travel ban early on. Soft power, and even the viability of a country, depends on certain long-term guarantees, guarantees that the current administration has blown away completely.

I'm pessimistic that even if a change in administration occurs early next year (and that is a major if), there would be anything any administration can do before the next Donald Trump takes office 4 or 8 years from now. I'm betting that the next "Trump" will be far smarter and won't make this one's mistakes. And if the Republic falls, no place on Earth will be safe.

That's not a reason to lie down and die. It's a reason to fight back with the frenzy of despair. I hope a quarter million dead by December will be enough. Enough for folks to remember that elections have consequences.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#66

Post by gaukes »

tmountain wrote: post #24
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

Executive branch is overpowered partially because the senate refuses to do its job. The original intent was for the senate to be slower moving and "cool" house legislation leading to slower moving governing structures. Over time, the executive branch was given additional power to "get stuff done", and we find ourselves in the situation we have today.

On the other hand.. the overreach of the executive branch is a response to the political deadlock in the legislative branch.

If we end up in a situation where neither branch can respond quickly and effectively, that may be worse than what we have now.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#67

Post by vmception »

tmountain wrote: post #24
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

Executive branch is overpowered partially because the senate refuses to do its job. The original intent was for the senate to be slower moving and "cool" house legislation leading to slower moving governing structures. Over time, the executive branch was given additional power to "get stuff done", and we find ourselves in the situation we have today.

and apparently, direct election of senators in 1913's 17th amendment was supposed to be the patch

now we are just out of solutions and too divided to get further patches in

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#68

Post by vsskanth »

lend000 wrote: post #59
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

If I understand correctly, this was always the policy, and they just took a few months longer than they should have to make an adjustment removing the rule for special pandemic circumstances.

they had already made an exception for F1 students to attend remote classes at the start of the pandemic. They were planning to end the exception for the fall semester, hence the outcry.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#69

Post by cwkoss »

nine_zeros wrote: post #14
atonse wrote: post #6

Excellent. The system worked this time. People challenged executive branch action through the judicial system and the executive branch backed down. But this should never have been an issue to begin with, think of all the unnecessary stress and anxiety this has caused for the hundreds of thousands of international students impacted by this.

> But this should never have been an issue to begin with, think of all the unnecessary stress and anxiety this has caused for the hundreds of thousands of international students impacted by this. More importantly, the long term damage is done. The noise was heard loud and clear that America is only as competent as its leader. Prospective future students are likely going to be ultra careful before choosing this countr…

And unfortunately it appears we will not get an opportunity to vote for a high competence leader in the November.

Re: U.S. backs down in fight with Harvard, MIT over student visas

#70

Post by School-Cotton »

tmountain wrote: post #24
supernova87a wrote: post #18

Another example of the haphazard throw-it-against-the-wall approach of what our country has chosen to have as our national experiment. This cannot be good for either side. Do we want to live in a system where if you hadn't been paying attention to the news for 1 week, we might have kicked >100,000 people out of the country? Is this ADD-style, whoever yells the loudest, social and political system working well for any…

Executive branch is overpowered partially because the senate refuses to do its job. The original intent was for the senate to be slower moving and "cool" house legislation leading to slower moving governing structures. Over time, the executive branch was given additional power to "get stuff done", and we find ourselves in the situation we have today.

> the senate refuses to do its job

It's not really the Senate's fault. Opposition parties almost never vote with government parties in any democratic legislature, so you shouldn't expect them to in the US.

The real problem is the outdated system that is set up to (1) only allow two major parties to exist, so a European-style coalition government isn't possible, and (2) require both major parties to agree in order to pass any legislation.

Post reply on HN