Judge Weighs Bid to Block 2026 CPT Restrictions for F-1 Students

A federal judge is considering whether to temporarily block the Department of Homeland Security’s restrictive 2026 guidance on Curricular Practical Training (CPT) for F-1 international students.

Judge Julia E. Kobick heard arguments on November 6, 2026, in Association of American Universities v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The plaintiffs asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to stay two Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) broadcast messages while the lawsuit continues.

As of November 11, 2026, the judge has not issued a written decision. The August guidance has not been stayed or set aside, meaning students must continue following their university’s current CPT policy. (casemagic.ai)

What Is the CPT Lawsuit Challenging?

The case concerns SEVP broadcast messages issued on August 12 and August 24, 2026. The messages interpret CPT as available only when practical training is necessary to complete the relevant academic curriculum—not simply an elective internship taken for credit.

Federal regulations define CPT as practical training that is an “integral part of an established curriculum.” CPT may include internships, cooperative education, work-study arrangements and required internships or practicums offered through cooperative agreements with a school. (ecfr.gov)

The Association of American Universities, NAFSA: Association of International Educators, the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, and the Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts filed the lawsuit on October 5.

The organizations allege that SEVP effectively replaced a framework under which schools could authorize certain elective, credit-bearing internships. They argue that DHS made this change without notice-and-comment rulemaking or adequate consideration of how students and universities had relied on the earlier interpretation. DHS maintains that the broadcasts did not create a new rule and instead clarified existing requirements. (nafsa.org)

For additional background, see Day1CPT.org’s coverage of the original lawsuit challenging the 2026 CPT restrictions.

What Happened at the November 6 Hearing?

The hearing focused on the plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction and a stay of agency action.

The plaintiffs argued that the August messages caused universities to pause or deny CPT authorizations, resulting in lost internships, canceled courses and uncertainty for Designated School Officials (DSOs). Their court filings cite examples of students losing access to credit-bearing opportunities that were connected to their academic programs but not required of every student pursuing the degree. (presidentsalliance.org)

The government argued that the broadcasts merely interpret the language already contained in the CPT regulation. It also pointed to pre-completion Optional Practical Training (OPT) as a possible alternative for students unable to receive CPT.

However, pre-completion OPT is not an automatic substitute. Unlike CPT, it requires an application to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and an Employment Authorization Document before work can begin. During academic sessions, pre-completion OPT is generally limited to 20 hours per week. (ecfr.gov)

Judge Kobick took the request under advisement rather than ruling during the hearing. No deadline for a decision has been announced. (immigration-analytics.com)

What Does This Mean for F-1 Students Now?

The lawsuit has not banned CPT, but it also has not yet reversed the August 2026 guidance.

Eligible students may still receive CPT authorization when their university determines that the proposed training satisfies federal requirements and the school’s current policy. A student must obtain a CPT-endorsed Form I-20 from the DSO before beginning the employment. (ecfr.gov)

Students planning internships should:

• Ask their DSO how the university is currently applying the August SEVP guidance.
• Confirm whether the training is a documented requirement of the applicable curriculum.
• Obtain written CPT authorization before performing any work, including potentially unpaid work that qualifies as employment.
• Avoid assuming that a pending lawsuit changes an existing denial, pause or university policy.

Universities may interpret and implement the guidance differently while the case remains pending. Students can review Day1CPT.org’s explanation of the broader 2026 CPT changes and university responses.

Does the Case Affect Day 1 CPT?

The lawsuit concerns CPT across F-1 academic programs; it is not specifically about universities commonly described as “Day 1 CPT” schools.

Day 1 CPT is not a separate federal immigration category. It generally refers to CPT authorized during the first academic term under the regulatory exception for graduate programs that require immediate participation in practical training. That exception remains subject to the same curriculum, major-field and DSO-authorization requirements applicable to other CPT. (ecfr.gov)

A future court order could affect how universities evaluate practical training that begins early in a graduate program. However, the lawsuit does not automatically create first-semester CPT eligibility or authorize students to work without a properly endorsed Form I-20.

What Happens Next?

Judge Kobick must decide whether to pause the challenged broadcasts while the court considers the full lawsuit.

If preliminary relief is granted, SEVP could be temporarily prevented from enforcing the restrictive interpretation. Universities would then need to determine whether and how to revise policies adopted after the August messages.

If preliminary relief is denied, the lawsuit can continue, but schools are likely to keep applying their current CPT standards unless DHS issues new guidance or a later court decision changes the legal position.

Frequently Asked Questions

Has a judge blocked the 2026 CPT restrictions?

No. As of November 11, 2026, the court has heard arguments but has not issued a written decision on the request for preliminary relief. Students should not assume that the November 6 hearing changed their university’s CPT policy.

Can F-1 students still receive CPT?

Yes. CPT has not been eliminated. A DSO can still authorize qualifying training that is directly related to the student’s major and satisfies the school’s interpretation of the established-curriculum requirement. The student must receive the CPT-endorsed Form I-20 before starting work.

Does filing the lawsuit restore elective, credit-bearing CPT?

No. Filing a lawsuit does not automatically suspend government guidance. Whether an elective, credit-bearing internship currently qualifies depends on the university’s policy and its application of the August 2026 SEVP messages.

When will the court issue a ruling?

No decision date has been announced. The judge took the preliminary-injunction request under advisement after the November 6 hearing and may issue a written order at any time.

Sources:

• Forbes — Immigration Lawsuit Challenges DHS for Restricting Student Internships
• Complaint in Association of American Universities v. DHS
• Plaintiffs’ Reply Supporting a Preliminary Injunction and Stay
• NAFSA — Legal Challenge to the CPT Broadcast Messages
• Electronic Code of Federal Regulations — 8 CFR § 214.2
• Immigration Analytics — CPT Lawsuit Hearing Taken Under Advisement