Our intrepid Harvard correspondent, sophomore Jay Gupta — who recently reported on how activists use the private college social app Sidechat to stoke political division — returns with another dispatch from the embattled Ivy League. This time, Harvard students react to the Trump administration’s ban on international students. The ban has been blocked by the courts and will be decided, finally, on May 29.

--

It’s graduation week at Harvard. Our seniors have lived through mask mandates, the affirmative action decision, pro-Palestine encampments, leadership changes, and now, a last-minute surprise. On Thursday, the Department of Homeland Security announced that it was revoking Harvard’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification. According to DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, “Harvard can no longer enroll foreign students, and existing foreign students must transfer or lose their legal status.”

The move follows a weeks-long battle between Harvard and the Trump administration on the topic of international student enrollment. On April 16th, Noem requested relevant disciplinary records of every student visa holder. On April 30th, Harvard handed over an unspecified number of records, allegedly a fraction of what Noem requested. On Thursday, Noem wrote that the university provided an “insufficient” response — and blocked it from admitting visa holders.

Within 24 hours, Harvard filed a 72-page lawsuit. Boston judge Allison D. Burroughs agreed that the international student ban would cause “irreparable injury” to Harvard and issued a temporary restraining order, delaying a final decision until May 29.

To put this in context: international students make up roughly 27% of our student body. They’re not eligible for federal financial aid, so most pay full tuition. They contribute over $591m in annual revenue to Harvard, America’s oldest higher-education institution, which also received nearly $700 million in federal funding last year — a year marked by controversial protests and an ousted president.

If you take the media’s coverage of Harvard at face value, you may expect our student body to be unanimously opposed to the ban. And while that’s the majority view, Harvard’s conservative scene has been quietly building. Within the past two years, membership in the Harvard Republican Club grew from 20 to 200 members, and its mailing list has grown from 100 to over 800 (representing 10% of the student body). In 2016, the club refused to endorse Trump. In 2020, they offered a partial endorsement. In 2024, they wrote a full endorsement.

On Sidechat, Harvard’s private social app for students, this rise in conservatism creates a dynamic where the most upvoted posts are still anti-Trump, but there’s enough Republican presence to generate rebuttals. The conversation that ensues still leans heavily toward the left, but less so than a few years ago.

One post, with over 530 upvotes, reads, “Genuinely, fuck everyone who voted for this.” In response, a Trump voter writes, “America first means American students should be prioritized in getting educated here. Why should a rich South Korean who is made [sic] be prioritized over a kid from Illinois struggling to make ends meet?” Dissenting voices are inundated with downvotes.

In another post, a student asks: “Can the Republicans on campus look me in the eye and explain why they support an administration that is so cruel to their international peers?” Commenter #3 retorts, “To protect American students who deserved to be here and were passed over in favor of wealthy oligarchs,” and receives 17 downvotes. The crux of the debate here — though it’s not framed in these terms — is how students define “America first.” Is Harvard violating its obligation to American taxpayers by giving seats to international students in place of domestic ones, or is it in our interest as a nation to educate elite students from around the world who will stay here and contribute to our economy?

Not all rhetoric is civil. In one comment thread, #15 writes: “Every tiniest drop of ‘I can tolerate republications in the name of open dialogue’ is being butchered and strained out of my centerleft body now.”

Another comment: “Fuck you if you voted for this fascist monster… fuck you… selfish bigoted xenophobic assholes.”

One-off reactionary posts like these are typical on Sidechat. The app’s anonymity — users are assigned random numerical usernames on each new post — gives students license to be inflammatory and extreme.

357 upvotes for “if you voted for him go fuck yourself.” 448 upvotes for “the harvard republic club can rot in hell.” 273 upvotes for telling Kristi Noem “genuinely you can die right now please please please.”

As I reported last week, Sidechat is often used to plan protests. With Harvard’s commencement ceremony scheduled for May 29th — the same date as the hearing — students are beginning to plan a potential demonstration. Given the admin’s accusations of anti-American behavior on campus, students are being strategic about optics. One poster writes: “if you protest during graduation, please do NOT stand away from the flag. i can already see the news stories painting it as anti-america.” A lengthy debate ensues, ending with, “So you want a docile student body that does nothing? Wow way to show tyranny you won’t stand for it lmao.”

As Harvard’s student body becomes more politically diverse (judging by the growth in college Republicans), Sidechat — our private watercooler — remains censorious and one-sided. I’m guessing the comments will only become more unhinged as we approach May 29.

—Jay Gupta