“Research Funding Shrinks as Borders Harden” — Exodus of Scholars and International Students From U.S. Campuses Accelerates ‘Brain Drain’ Under Trump Pressure

Scholars Leaving the U.S. Find New Homes in Canada, Europe and China
Trump’s Second Administration Sharply Curtails Federal Research Funding
Tighter Entry and Residency Requirements Reduce International Student Inflows, Straining University Finances

Talent is steadily departing American academia. As securing research funding has become substantially more difficult under President Donald Trump’s second administration, tighter entry and residency requirements for international students and researchers are prompting a growing number of scholars to relocate to other major countries. Experts warn that if this brain drain persists, it could weaken the broader research and talent foundations of U.S. universities and erode America’s competitive advantage in advanced science and technology.

Canada Draws Talent From the U.S.

According to academic sources on Sept. 9, the brain drain from U.S. universities has intensified markedly in recent months. On Aug. 28, for example, Canada announced that it had recruited 48 leading scholars based in the United States to 21 Canadian universities in a single initiative. They included renowned astronomer Sarah Seager, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); Brian Kuhlman, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an expert in computational protein design; and Phillip Zamore, director of the RNA Therapeutics Institute at UMass Chan Medical School. According to the British multidisciplinary scientific journal Nature, many of them cited uncertainty surrounding U.S. research funding as a decisive factor in their move.

Zamore, who has taken up a position at McGill University in Montreal, reportedly faced the prospect of downsizing his laboratory after funding from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) was delayed by as much as 18 months. He is set to receive $1.1 million annually through the Canadian government’s roughly $1.24 billion Global Impact+ Research Talent Initiative. Numerous researchers working in areas shunned by the Trump administration, including sustainability, climate and the environment, have also relocated to Canada.

More Researchers Head to Europe and China

The number of U.S.-based researchers moving to Europe is also increasing. In February, the French government announced the first 46 recipients of Choose France for Science, its program for attracting leading overseas researchers. Of those selected, 41 were affiliated with U.S. research institutions. Their previous institutions included Columbia University with eight researchers, the University of California, Los Angeles with four, and the University of Washington, NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center and Stanford University with two each. Climate, biodiversity and sustainable societies accounted for the largest share of research fields at 37%, followed by health and life sciences at 30%, while low-carbon energy and space research each represented 9%. The program has a total budget of approximately $116 million, with each researcher eligible to receive up to about $2.9 million.

A significant number of researchers are also heading to China. According to CNN’s compilation of public announcements from universities and research institutions, at least 55 prominent and early-career scientists moved from U.S. universities to full-time positions at Chinese research institutions last year. Extending the review period back to the beginning of 2024 raises the figure to roughly 85, many of whom were Chinese-born scientists who had built their research careers in the United States. Omar Yaghi, a co-recipient of last year’s Nobel Prize in Chemistry, also left the University of California, Berkeley in July to join Tsinghua University as a full-time professor. At Tsinghua, Yaghi is expected to lead the establishment of a research center for AI-powered materials chemistry involving the departments of chemistry, chemical engineering, artificial intelligence (AI), computer science and materials engineering.

Trump Tightens the Purse Strings on Academia

The reduction and uncertain disbursement of U.S. federal research funding are widely cited as the primary drivers of this talent exodus. According to Nature, more than 7,800 research projects funded by the NIH and the National Science Foundation (NSF) were canceled or frozen last year. Although some funding was subsequently restored through court orders and agreements between the government and universities, roughly 2,600 projects had yet to return to normal as of early this year. Securing funding for new research has also become substantially more difficult. The number of new research projects funded by the NSF last year fell 25% below the preceding 10-year average, while the NIH recorded a 24% decline. The NIH, in particular, was reportedly unable to disburse a substantial portion of its $47 billion annual research budget on schedule after meetings of its grant review panels were suspended for an extended period early last year.

The decline in research funding has directly affected university staffing. Last year, leading research universities including Harvard University, MIT, Emory University and the University of California, San Diego successively froze or scaled back new hiring, while some also restricted travel and salary increases. Several institutions, including the University of Pennsylvania, withdrew informal offers of admission to prospective doctoral students that same year or declined to admit new students to certain doctoral programs altogether. The problem has continued this year. The NSF is supporting only about 6,100 new research projects this year, roughly 30% fewer than a year earlier and the lowest number in more than four decades. Funding disbursements were also delayed during the first half of the year, particularly in biology and the social sciences, leaving researchers struggling not only to launch new projects but also to pay researchers and graduate students.

Higher Barriers to Entry and Residency for International Students

The tighter entry and residency requirements imposed on international students and researchers under the second Trump administration are another major adverse factor. In March and April last year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) terminated the records of large numbers of international students in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS), citing past misdemeanors, encounters with police and visa revocations. In May of the same year, DHS also notified Harvard University that it intended to revoke the institution’s Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. The measure would not only have prevented Harvard from admitting new students on F-1 and J-1 visas but could also have caused existing international students to lose their legal status or transfer to other institutions. Although a court blocked its enforcement and the certification was never revoked, the U.S. Department of State maintained the pressure by instructing U.S. embassies and consulates worldwide that same month to temporarily suspend new interview appointments for F, M and J visas.

Screening standards became even more stringent after visa processing resumed. Beginning in June last year, the State Department required reviews of the social media accounts and online activity of all F, M and J visa applicants, while directing applicants to make their accounts public. Consular officers were instructed to examine applicants’ online posts and activity for signs of hostility toward the U.S. government or its institutions. In addition, DHS proposed in August last year that the Duration of Status (D/S) framework for F-1 international students and J-1 exchange visitors be abolished and replaced, in principle, with a fixed maximum stay of four years. Until now, holders of these visas could maintain lawful status without a separate departure deadline as long as they continued their academic or research programs in good standing. Under the new system, however, anyone requiring more than four years would have to undergo an additional review to extend their stay. The proposal was finalized as a regulation in July this year and is scheduled to take full effect on Sept. 15.

Table 1. International Student and Researcher Restrictions Under the Second Trump Administration

Student Visa Issuance in Decline

These measures have led to a pronounced decline in the number of new international students entering U.S. universities. According to the Open Doors survey conducted by the Institute of International Education (IIE), which is sponsored by the U.S. Department of State, the number of international students enrolling at U.S. universities for the first time last fall fell 17% from the previous year. Excluding the COVID-19 pandemic, this was the steepest decline since the data series began. The trend is even clearer in visa issuance figures. According to an analysis of State Department statistics by the Chronicle of Higher Education, the number of F-1 student visas issued between May and August—when visa issuance is concentrated ahead of the fall semester—plunged 36%, or 97,000, from the same period a year earlier. India, one of the largest sources of international students, received only about 22,870 F-1 visas during the period, a decline of approximately 60% from the previous year.

The findings are similar when the timeframe is extended to the full year. The State Department reported that the number of student visas issued last year fell 23% from the previous year. Issuance to Indian nationals plummeted 56.6%, while declines exceeded 70% in several countries, including Iran, Myanmar and Venezuela. Against this backdrop, universities are accelerating contingency measures such as deferred enrollment. In the IIE survey, 72% of U.S. universities allowed international students who had been admitted for the fall semester last year but were unable to enter the country on time to defer enrollment until this spring, while 56% permitted deferrals until this fall. These barriers to attracting international students are likely to increase financial pressure on regional and smaller universities that depend heavily on tuition revenue, potentially impeding the cultivation and deployment of highly skilled talent.