Navigating the complexities of student visas has become even more daunting, as discussed by John Byrne, Maria Wich-Vila, and Caroline Diarte Edwards in this compelling episode with Amber Davis from Waypoint Immigration. The episode sheds light on the recent State Department mandate to scrutinize social media accounts of student visa applicants more closely. Amber, with her extensive background in immigration law, provides crucial insights into how these policies might unfold.

A key takeaway is the heightened vigilance required of applicants’ online presences. Amber notes that while occasional critical posts may not immediately doom an application, a consistent pattern of negativity towards U.S. policies could pose significant risks. The emphasis on public social media accounts calls for a strategic approach: maintaining transparency during the application process while perhaps reverting to privacy settings once in the U.S. However, applicants must be prepared to make accounts public again if requested by authorities.

Amber also addresses practical concerns about the feasibility of this scrutiny, given resource limitations within the State Department. Despite the logistical challenges, she advises applicants to proceed as if their digital footprints are under thorough review. The episode serves as a crucial reminder for MBA hopefuls and prospective students to manage their social media narratives carefully during their visa applications, considering the unpredictable nature of current U.S. immigration policies.

Episode Transcript

Note: This transcript was generated by AI and may contain minor inaccuracies.

[00:00:07] – John

Well, hello, everyone. This is John Byrne with Poets of Wants. Welcome to business Casual, our weekly podcast with my co-host, Caroline Diarte Edwards and Maria Wickvilla. We have a special guest today, given all the news about student visas and the uncertainty out there created by the Trump administration. Our guest today is Amber Davis, who is the founder and principal of Waypoint Immigration. She’s been doing immigration law for a very long time. She’s worked for a couple of major firms before starting her own firm in 2021. In fact, she worked for the largest immigration firm out there in the world. Amber, welcome.

[00:00:50] – Amber

Thank you. I’m so excited to be here.

[00:00:53] – John

We’re recording this today, but yesterday, State Department basically said that it’s resumed interviews for candidates for student visas, but with a new wrinkle. It’s going to do much greater scrutiny of social media accounts. It has said publicly that you better keep your account public. I’m assuming that if they could tell that it was deep six, that you’ll probably be denied. And this scrutiny will examine things like, well, if you said something negative about the United United States, or let me put it even more pointedly, if you said something negative about the Trump administration, beware. Ammer, am I right?

[00:01:38] – Amber

Unfortunately, I think you are. It seems a bit anti-American to say that things have gone this far. It’s hard to know exactly how this policy is going to be implemented. Each consular officer has a measure of discretion. But going off of things that their ultimate boss has said, Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, we do think that this is going to be a very broad sweep on social media. I can get into what kinds of things, what kinds of statements you might want to rethink posting on social media and that thing. But I will say I don’t love that I’m policing people’s speech here. It feels anti-American. It’s not typically the way things go. But, yeah, we can get into that in a little bit. I think you’re absolutely right, John, unfortunately.

[00:02:23] – John

I mentioned before that the State Department said your social media accounts better stay public. What do you make of that? I’m assuming that if you did something that you think could put you in trouble, it’s out there, you got to explain it, and you can’t take it away. Is that correct?

[00:02:40] – Amber

I mean, you can still delete posts. If you get drunk one night and make a mistake and post something that you never should have posted in the first place. Everyone does on social media. Everyone has a post that they’re ashamed of. You can delete it. It’s not like it’s there forever. But if you have a pattern or practice of posting things that the US government might find are critical of their policies or critical of Americans in general or critical of certain US foreign policies or policies that friendly states to the US are also pursuing, you may have a harder time obtaining a student visa. Now, the impact of people who are already in the US is a little bit lesser. The State Department has said that accounts need to be public when they’re doing the vetting at the consulate. I’m not taking that policy to mean right now that they have to remain public indefinitely. I definitely think that once you have the visa and enter the US, turning the account settings back to private is going to be a fair thing to do. But you would need to be prepared at the request of any government agent to then make them public again so that vetting can resume.

[00:03:51] – John

Now, I’m wondering, does the State Department really have the resources to do a careful review of everyone’s social media account, or is this It’s more of a, Oh, you better watch out. You better not cry. You better not pout. I’m telling you why Trump is here to deny your visa.

[00:04:11] – Amber

It’s a fair question. I usually tell people, just assume that the government has the resources to dig as deep into your public profile and all of your posts as they can. Realistically, this is not going to happen. Realistically, the vetting of student visa applications is done in It’s not even done in hours. There is no way that an individual consular officer is going to be able to scroll through a single social media account and find everything that may be critical of the US. They will be looking for more accounts that have a pattern and practice of doing so. If you’re a social media activist, I would recommend maybe revisiting plans or having a backup plan because you may not be able to enter the US on a new student visa at this time. But if you had a couple of posts here or there criticizing Americans or criticizing something the Trump administration did, I don’t actually think it’s high risk that the visa application will be denied, but it’s something that you need to be aware could happen. I also want to just bring up, we don’t know exactly how the social media of editing is happening.

[00:05:19] – Amber

When the whole fiasco with the student visa revocations happened in the US, I think it became clear that the State Department was deploying some AI program that was going back through criminal records, arrest records, any encounter that anyone had had with law enforcement, regardless of how it played out and whether or not the person actually created a crime or committed a crime, I should say. I do think that they have some of these AI tools to scroll social media, and some officers may use them on some cases. I do not think that they have the manpower to do this for every single application. But it is the State Department putting everyone on notice saying, We could go as deep as we wanted into your profile. We could find anything, so you better be on your best behavior.

[00:06:13] – John

Right. Now, Caroline, you regularly deal at Fortuna with international applicants who are looking to come to US schools, among others. What are you hearing and how can Amber help?

[00:06:26] – Speaker

Well, it’s great news that the appointments have reopened because there was a huge amount of anxiety when that closed down. And so it’s opened up relatively quickly. It’s been a few weeks, I think, that things have been closed down. So I’m really pleased that it has reopened. So hopefully, candidates or admits will be able to get to campus for this fall. Seems like it should mean that schools won’t have to deal with giving deferrals, or I know schools had also been looking at whether they would need to offer Zoom classes for international students who weren’t able to turn up on campus, which would have been going back to pandemic times and not an ideal situation at all. So it is good news. Of course, as Amber said, there’s a bit of uncertainty about how this is going to play out, but I think it’s encouraging for candidates, both for the admits and then for, of course, right now, we’re working a lot with candidates who are applying to arrive in the US in the fall of 2026. So that’s quite a long way down the line. Hopefully, we will not have any more bad news about the process.

[00:07:39] – Speaker

And what I wanted to ask you about, Amber, is could you clarify a bit the situation with Harvard? Because there’s been a lot of media focus on how Trump has been attacking Harvard, specifically, and his attempt to ban Harvard from hosting international students. So could you talk a bit about the current situation there and whether that will also impact potentially other institutions beyond Harvard?

[00:08:06] – Amber

Yeah, I think what happened with Harvard has definitely had a what we call chilling effect on a lot of university activity with regard to foreign students. The kinds of records that they requested on Harvard students are not typically the kinds of records that universities keep in one place as a database on foreign students and are ready to hand over to the government. Now, Universities, I think, are on notice that they, too, could be targeted and asked for those records with that scrutiny and then held accountable, I think, for a lot of the actions that their students are taking, whereas before, the student would be seen as acting on their own. The current lawsuit with Harvard, I don’t remember if there’s been any news on that in the last week. Harvard can still host foreign students right now, but that lawsuit is not fully resolved. We don’t know if Harvard ultimately will prevail, I have an inkling that they will, at least on this particular matter. But that doesn’t mean the Trump administration is going to stop what they’re trying to do with blocking Harvard and Columbia and some of these other major US universities from hosting foreign students.

[00:09:17] – Amber

This is politically motivated in the US. The Trump arm of the Republican Party definitely sees these major US universities and institutions as being fundamentally at odds with its agenda. Anything it can do to lessen the money that’s incoming into these institutions or lessen the number of students that are going into these institutions It is something that the administration may pursue or at least seriously look at. I don’t think that we’ve seen the end of this. I don’t think that the current pause on the enforcement action against Harvard is the end of the story at all. The It can cause them uncertainty once students are here in the US. I am recommending that students still apply for Harvard, students still attend Harvard, but that they are looking actively at backup plans so that they know where they would go if suddenly the Trump administration was successful, either at the end of this lawsuit or with a whole different policy and a different process of going about it in banning Harvard from hosting foreign students. It’s really important to have a backup plan. I know that’s not very much certainty. Everyone’s looking for a little bit of certainty right now on what the government can or cannot do.

[00:10:40] – Amber

But these things have not been litigated in the US before. This is a totally new and novel situation. I can’t tell you exactly how it will play out, unfortunately.

[00:10:52] – John

It’s hard to imagine that the courts would uphold a complete and total ban on a university’s ability to enroll a foreign student. I mean, I just can’t even imagine a scenario where that’s possible. And of course, a judge has already overruled the Trump administration. As you point out, Trump is still pursuing this litigation. It has to get resolved. But the other thing the Trump administration could do and did last time in the first administration was to delay the process of issuing student visas. And in some cases, those delays prevented students from getting here in time to start their studies in the fall. Because of the pause in interviews and because there’s a little bit of a backlog, and we really don’t know how this additional scrutiny is going to play out and whether it will cause some delays, do you think that there could be some delays in getting processed this year?

[00:11:55] – Amber

Unfortunately, yes. I would encourage anyone on the call who does not yet have their visa to really diligently look for visa slots and visa appointments. We are expecting that the new policies are going to result in fewer slots being available overall as officer officers are instructed to spend a little bit more time vetting each application. I’m not expecting necessarily a mass panic or anything like that. I do think most students will be able to obtain their visas, but availability will be more limited than it has in the past, and the process will potentially take a little bit longer as more applications get placed into administrative processing.

[00:12:37] – John

Do you know, Amber, if in fact the cost-cutting exercise that initially was put forth by Elon Musk, affected the people who have to process and approve visas?

[00:12:51] – Amber

There were some cuts at the State Department. What we’ve been hearing, though, more than the impacts of the cuts, are the sense of panic among federal employees, where they are very, very concerned for their jobs and very, very concerned at taking any actions that may be outside of what the ultimate boss, the State Department, would like them to do. They’re not necessarily getting the clear guidance that they need for that. So internally, everything seems to be moving slower. Internally, the works are all Then they certainly are not hiring new staff, even as they let some go. So overall, yes, everything will be a little bit slower, unfortunately.

[00:13:41] – John

Maria, your thoughts on all this?

[00:13:45] – Speaker

I mean, at least now there’s a chance for some of these students to get these appointments in time. I do think it’ll probably be fewer people. I shared on an earlier podcast that you Even I was trying to get a document notarized or apostaled by the State Department a month or two ago, and the cuts there impacted the delays on that for me as well. I’m a US citizen. Hopefully, at least now there will be a chance, and hopefully everyone’s just hitting the refresh button on that consular appointment system, day and night, morning, noon, and night, just trying to get those spots. But at least now there’s a chance. I guess the small Silver Lining is that the past few weeks have given people a chance to remove perhaps some of those unsavory posts that they might not have had a chance to remove prior. Now when they do get the appointment, they can walk in with a much sunnier, kitten-filled timeline and not one with anti-American posts that will keep them out of the country.

[00:14:54] – John

Yes. Now, the other thing that Amber does on a regular basis is help graduates with OPT issues, and I’m assuming H-1B visas. This is a two-prong issue, really. First off, you get the student visa, and it’s becoming a little more difficult and a little more uncertain because the practices are changing. But the other part of this is it does change the risk equation for an international student who has dreamt of getting that MBA degree or any graduate degree and then getting employed in the US. What’s your outlook on OPT? Business schools rush to become STEM designated, in part to attract more international applicants because it gave you three years of work in the US if you had a STEM-related job. But we’ve heard Stephen Miller in the past talk about eliminating OPT. The administration has not really taken any action on this yet. You look into your crystal ball, Amber, and tell me what you see.

[00:16:06] – Amber

I still recommend everyone choose a STEM OPT eligible program. It opens up your options. Most people do end up wanting that in the end. For now, everyone who’s going into school should proceed as if that will be an option. The current administration is only going to be another roughly three and a half years. Some of you will be doing school a little bit longer. Some of you will graduate and do your first year of OPT, but then you won’t have STEM OPT when the current president or when the current president is overseeing things. So take a little bit of a longer view on this and don’t get too wrapped up in the politics when looking at work after school. You should be aware, though, that there is talk about changing the OPT program from some senior-level officials who are going to be coming in to USCIS, the agency runs everything here in the US. The director for that agency has not yet been confirmed, so is not yet installed into that position of authority, but we’re expecting him to be confirmed at some point over the next couple of months. In Congressional testimony, the director has said that he would like to make it a priority to rescind OPT.

[00:17:23] – Amber

Now, he didn’t go into detail about what that means or whether it would just affect STEM or whether it would be all of OPT. I will say during the last Trump administration, this was a priority of some of the government officials, and nothing ever came to bear. They didn’t take the steps necessary to actually get the ball rolling on the administrative side to actually rescind the OPT. I don’t want everyone to panic prematurely here, but have a backup option because it could start to go in that direction in the near future here. We’ll just have to see what ends up as top priority on the list when the director comes in to USCIAS.

[00:18:10] – Speaker

Amber, can we assume that social media profiles might be reviewed as a part of OPT? If it was required to come into the country, would it be required, do you think, on the tail end of the process?

[00:18:22] – Amber

There isn’t a mechanism to do that right now. I mean, any officer can look up someone’s social media profile. I have I’ve heard some anecdotal reports from people who are applying for benefits, and they say, Oh, USCIS viewed my LinkedIn profile, which is very odd. It can happen. Whatever officer is adjudicating the case is empowered to use the tools at their disposal. They can look at your Facebook, they can look at your LinkedIn, they can look at your WeChat, they can do any of that. But it doesn’t seem to be a typical part of the adjudication process. Major changes with a degree of notice would need to be put into place for them to even collect things like social media handles. I think that’s far in the future if it does happen.

[00:19:14] – John

With When a person has denied a student visa, what is the appeal process like?

[00:19:20] – Amber

There’s not really an appeal process for a denial of student visa. Yes, there really is not. In some cases, if they are outright wrong, an attorney can contact a specialized department within the Department of State and ask them to revisit the decision. Sometimes applicants are successful in asking the post-director to revisit the decision. But typically, there’s not an appeal process. Most people would reapply for the student visa. They reapply, and they come prepared to submit documentation that overcomes, hopefully, the reason that they were denied. The problem His most denials, though, are on 214(b), which is a really vague part of law that mostly deals with intent issues, where they don’t believe that the person is a true, temporary non-immigrant. It’s really difficult to counteract that if you don’t know the specific facts that the officer was taking into account when they made that determination. Reapplications are often successful, though. I do encourage people listening. If you are denied your first student visa, go ahead and apply again. You can even apply again for the same season. If you get denied tomorrow, maybe you can reapply in a couple of months, and maybe you can still enter for that semester.

[00:20:43] – Amber

More typically, though, people will wait for the next cycle, and so they may wait another year, establish some ties in their home country at that point, come prepared with that documentation, and then wait at least for the second time.

[00:20:57] – John

Right.

[00:20:58] – Speaker

Amber, getting into the nitty-gritty of applying, what’s your advice on handling those new social media requirements and exactly the information that candidates need to provide and how to handle that?

[00:21:10] – Amber

Yeah. First, you do need to be really thorough in what you provide on your DS 164. You do need to list all of your social media accounts. I would really recommend rethinking deleting accounts at the stage that you’re applying for a non-immigrant visa. Just take a step back and think about how that looks as a whole. If you’re deleting a really active account, the US Department of State, they may still find out about that account, and then the deletion looks very suspicious because of the timing. If you’re deleting an ancient account that you haven’t posted to in a long time, that’s probably fine. You’re just cleaning up social media at that point in time. Then as far as individual posts go, it’s not unusual in your long history of social media use. You might have some post that could be construed as critical of something in the United States. You don’t need to be too concerned about that. If you do want to do some cleanup and find one or two posts and think, Well, this doesn’t really represent my viewpoints anymore, or I was really not thinking when I posted this, You can delete one or two here or there, and I would generally recommend doing that.

[00:22:20] – Amber

However, if you are an avid poster and you have a lot to say and have done some posts that really would not look good for a consular officer, if you do a mass deletion, that also looks suspicious. I am concerned that the US Department of State has access to some programs that can go back and see if you’ve done some mass deletion activity like that. I would just assume that they know that you’ve posted, and be careful when you’re doing cleanup. One or two is fine, mass deletion, probably not. If you do find yourself deleting posts en masse, you should probably to someone first before applying and understands the risks of applying. I say this because the Department of State has this provision where if you are misleading a consular officer, it can be considered misrepresentation or fraud. That provision of law is, unfortunately, very erratically applied, I would say, where consular officers can use it as a justification for almost anything. Do some cleanup. Think about what’s on your social media profiles. But if you have a lot, talk to someone first. Talk to an attorney, talk to another professional before you make your visa application and before you disclose those social media profiles to the government.

[00:23:43] – John

So, Amber, I really have to delete the Trump in a chicken outfit picture I put up on Instagram?

[00:23:51] – Amber

I would probably delete it, John. I would probably delete it. Like I said, it’s a normal to share me. It’s normal to have one or two things that can be considered objectionable. A normal counselor officer is not going to deny the visa just because of that. But again, we don’t really know what they’re looking at. We don’t know what their mindset is when they’re reviewing the application, so it’s probably better to delete that.

[00:24:20] – John

I think because they’re fearful of losing their jobs, they’re going to be extra careful, probably.

[00:24:26] – Amber

Yeah. I do want to repeat. This isn’t It’s not really how the government is supposed to function. You are allowed to criticize the government. You’re allowed to criticize the president to some degree. But we are in a new era where pronouncements are being made, and we don’t know exactly how they’re going to be implemented. I think the concert officers as well are a little bit fuzzy on how these need to be enforced. Be careful going into that environment. Do what is best for you, and make sure you’re making a disclosure. But yes, you can delete the meme of Trump in a chicken suit. It would probably be a good idea to do at this point in time.

[00:25:10] – John

Indeed.

[00:25:11] – Speaker

Amber, is there a difference between being, let’s say, an anti-Trump anti-US post versus a pro-American enemy post? Would a pro-Palestinian post that does not even mention the US, where would that It’s my fault because I’m a little bit shocked to hear, and of course, it shouldn’t surprise me, so I don’t know why I’m shocked, but to hear that, Oh, well, if you delete a bunch of posts en masse, they might have a way to figure that out somehow. That is very chilling for me to hear. Because for the past couple of weeks, I’ve just been telling people, Just delete as much as you can. If it’s not kittens or your kids or a rainbow, get rid of it. At this point now, if it’s like, Well, you shouldn’t probably delete everything you’ve ever posted that’s political, I wonder, do you have any sense? I mean, of course, who knows? Nobody knows for sure. But any sense of, is it more you think they’re going to be sensitive to anything anti-Trump Versus…

[00:26:18] – Amber

This is also a topic where it comes down to the individual councilor officer and their understanding of what the policies are. I will say anything related to the Israel-Palestine conflict is going to receive more scrutiny than any other conflict around the globe. If you post something that is pro-Ukraine, even though the US and Ukraine are feuding a little bit and Trump doesn’t agree with Zelensky, that’s probably okay. That wouldn’t necessarily be flagged unless you were criticizing Trump about it. With the Palestinian conflicts, though, we’ve heard some remarks from Marco Rubio that indicate that the Trump administration will more of you that if you are giving support to enemies of the US, then that would be flagged as a negative factor in the application. Now, obviously, if you are giving pronuncements in support of Hamas as a group, that is definitely a no-go. We are concerned, though, that support for the people in Palestine would also rise to that level. We’re not sure about it, to be honest. We’re really not sure about it. I think there’s a huge difference between saying that humanitarian aid should flow to Gaza and expressing support for a terrorist group.

[00:27:44] – Amber

But if I put myself in a consular officer’s shoes and I read the directives that are coming out and I read Marco Rubio’s statements, I am a little bit concerned that they mean to exclude those kinds of statements as well. Like I said, if you’re a political activist, if you’ve been posting a lot about the Palestine-Israel conflict, and especially even if you’ve just been talking about it in a humanitarian sense, I would have more backup plan and may consider reapplying next year just because of the uncertainty. I hate saying that because, Maria, you said the word chilling. It’s a word that’s often used when we’re talking about free speech in America. The government is not allowed to have a chilling effect on free speech, but effectively, that is what is happening.

[00:28:35] – Speaker

Should someone who’s applying now to enroll next year, and let’s say they’ve had this 10-year-long history of really inflammatory posts, should they maybe… I know this, probably they’ll see through this, but if they start today and they create a brand new, it’s the new Maria online, and it’s totally, I create a new one. Then I have a year long history of this brand new account that has my name Or no, is that too transparent? It’s a little too obvious.

[00:29:04] – Amber

Yeah, it is my understanding that you would still need to disclose the prior social media account. I believe it’s usually a 10-year cutoff, so you need to disclose everything that would be used.

[00:29:14] – John

Oh, 10 years.

[00:29:15] – Speaker

Yikes.

[00:29:17] – Amber

Don’t quote me on that because I will need to go back and check the form. I believe that that is the standard. I’ve had people put their my space accounts on the form before, even though they’re not being used at all anymore. The State Department has indicated that they want everyone to be thorough. And if you are not thorough, it can be considered an attempt to mislead the government, which rises to the level of fraud or misrepresentation, which is a much more serious accusation than just getting the visa denied on a 214(b) allegation. If you have a hint of that in your file, it’s considered to be more of a permanent ban. It’s very hard to fight that flag in your file.

[00:30:04] – John

So your general advice is, if you want to come, make sure you get an appointment as quickly as you can. Have a plan B, maybe even a plan C, whether you come or not. If you’re denied, maybe you wait a month or so and you reapply and try to address whatever issue you may think came up, because oftentimes, they won’t even tell what the issues are, right? Yes. Which is a nightmare in and of itself. And expect this to be a changing dynamic situation, right, Amber? Because suddenly, things seem to come out of the blue with this administration that are totally unexpected and cannot be predicted. So you have to learn how to go with the flow, right? It’s really essential and have the plan B and plan C. I think you’re going to have plenty of work this season for you and your colleagues at your firm, unfortunately. But again, we really appreciate your insights and thoughts. It’s Amber Davis at Waypoint Immigration USA. Look them up. They specialize in student visas in the US, do work on OPT and H-1B, among others. And if you’re having a little problem or some challenges, check out Amber and see if her firm can help you.

[00:31:38] – John

This is John Byrne with Poets of Quants. Thanks for listening.