Is OPT Ending? What DHS Rulemaking Means for Indian Students in the US

OPT’s future is uncertain as DHS considers restrictions. Indian students must plan carefully, track policy changes and global alternatives.
December 22, 2025 Study Abroad

TL;DR

  • Optional Practical Training (OPT) has long been central to the appeal of studying in the United States—but in late 2025, its future has become uncertain.
  • The US Department of Homeland Security has confirmed that a rulemaking process is underway to review “practical training” for F-1 students, raising concerns about possible restrictions or even elimination.
  • While no proposal has been released and immediate change is unlikely, political pressure to curb post-study work is growing. For Indian students—now the largest users of OPT—this could significantly alter the value of a US degree. 
  • YUNO LEARNING explains what is known, what remains speculation, and why students entering in 2026–27 must monitor policy closely, evaluate backup destinations, and choose universities for long-term global mobility, not just OPT alone.

For Indian students dreaming of American degrees and global careers, the Optional Practical Training (OPT) programme has always been a key part of the US education package. But in late 2025, the future of OPT — especially post-study work — has become uncertain. Here is everything you need to know right now: the facts, the risks, the politics, and what it may mean for your study-abroad plans.

The Situation Right Now

In the third week of November 2025, several US and international media outlets reported that the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was preparing a regulatory proposal that could eliminate or severely restrict OPT — the work authorisation international students use after graduation. 

What we know right now:

  1. DHS has confirmed that a rulemaking process is underway, focusing on “Practical Training” for F-1 students.
  2. The text of the proposed rule has not been released, so its exact provisions remain unknown.
  3. The White House has not issued a formal policy statement, although senior officials have made comments indicating a desire to limit post-study work for foreign nationals.
  4. DHS officials have floated several possibilities — from total abolition of post-completion OPT to partial reduction (for example, shortening work authorisation, limiting eligible fields, or imposing wage and compliance requirements). 

What we do NOT know yet:

  1. Whether STEM-OPT (the 24-month extension) will survive or be merged into a new system.
  2. Whether students already on OPT or with approved applications will be “grandfathered” or affected retroactively.
  3. Whether DHS intends to replace OPT with a smaller, more restricted training programme.
  4. Whether Congress will intervene, or if courts will block the rule once issued.

Likelihood of immediate change:

Given how US regulatory procedures work, a few key points apply:

  1. Even if DHS publishes a proposal tomorrow, it must go through public comment, revisions, and final rulemaking — a process that can take several months.
  2. Lawsuits are almost guaranteed, which could delay implementation further.
  3. It is unlikely that OPT would disappear overnight, and extremely unlikely that any change could affect those already on OPT or graduating in Spring 2026.

However, the policy direction of the present US government is clearly toward restricting pathways that allow temporary workers to enter the labour market without explicit Congressional authorisation. Thus, although nothing is final, Indian students must prepare for the possibility that OPT may not look the same by 2027. 

Why This Proposal Emerged: A Long History of Opposition 

Many students are hearing about OPT controversies for the first time in 2025 — but opposition to the programme is not new. In fact, it has deep roots stretching back more than a decade. 

Historical objections (2008 onwards)

When DHS expanded OPT in 2008 by creating the STEM-OPT extension, critics began calling it:

  • An “unauthorised guest-worker programme”
  • A loophole allowing employers to hire cheaper labour
  • A regulatory creation not approved by Congress. 

These objections came from:

  • Certain labour unions
  • Restrictionist think tanks
  • Political groups concerned with immigration
  • Lawmakers emphasising “protect American workers” 

Between 2014 and 2022, the Washington Alliance of Technology Workers (WashTech) repeatedly sued DHS, arguing that OPT was illegal because Congress never authorised work rights for F-1 students after graduation.  Although WashTech lost in federal courts — and OPT was upheld — these cases kept political and ideological pressure alive. 

Recent opposition (2020–2025)

High-profile incidents (fake employers, fraudulent training firms, visa mills) and GAO reports identifying enforcement gaps renewed criticism. 

Politicians argued:

  1. OPT undermines US labour
  2. Oversight is weak
  3. Employers exploit it to avoid H-1B caps
  4. Fraud undermines security and transparency 

By 2025, eliminating or restricting OPT had become a mainstream policy position for certain influential lawmakers and DHS officials. 

How Many Students Actually Use OPT? Why Is It So Important?

In the academic year 2024–2025, approximately:

  1. 1.18 million international students were studying in the US
  2. Over 294,000 were approved for OPT — an increase of more than 20 percent over the previous year.
  3. More than half of all international students in the US study STEM fields, and a major share of them seek OPT or STEM-OPT.
  4. Tens of thousands use OPT as a bridge into H-1B visas, which require employer sponsorship.

For Indian students, OPT has become especially essential:

  1. Indian students are now the largest group of STEM OPT applicants.
  2. Many Indian students use OPT to gain experience, secure H-1B selection, and later apply for permanent residence.
  3. Simply put: Without OPT, the value proposition of US study would change drastically for Indian students.

The Reputation of the OPT Programme: Clean or Problematic? 

The truth is mixed. The programme’s strengths:

  1. OPT has enabled hundreds of thousands of students to gain valuable US work experience.
  2. Employers strongly value the skills of international graduates.
  3. Many successful entrepreneurs, researchers, and innovators began their US careers via OPT.
  4. Supporters argue most OPT participants comply fully with rules, and cases of fraud represent only a small percentage. 

Documented problems:

  1. Government audits and Senate investigations have found:
  2. Poor employer vetting
  3. Weak enforcement
  4. Fraudulent companies offering fake “training”
  5. Students reporting employment they never performed
  6. “Staged offices” set up solely to support visa filings.

These weaknesses have been politically exploited by critics who argue the programme is:

  • Not transparent
  • Vulnerable to abuse
  • Harmful to American workers
  • Improperly created by regulation. 

Thus, while OPT is invaluable for students, its regulatory framework has known weaknesses, which opponents have used to push for reform or abolition. 

What Happens If OPT Is Eliminated or Curtailed? Multi-Layered Impact

The potential consequences are wide-ranging. Though predictions are uncertain, the broad direction of impact is clear. 

Impact on international student enrollment

The US is attractive because it offers:

  • World-class universities
  • Strong job opportunities
  • OPT → H-1B → Green Card pathways 

If OPT disappears:

  • Many Indian students (especially in STEM and business fields) will reconsider U.S. education.
  • Enrollments may drop significantly within 1–3 years.
  • Canada, UK, Australia, Ireland, Germany, and UAE may benefit instantly.
  • University revenue — especially in STEM programmes — will fall sharply. 

This would especially hurt:

  • Mid-tier US universities
  • STEM programmes dependent on international enrolment
  • Graduate engineering and computer science departments 

Impact on the U.S. economy and industries

Foreign graduates:

  • Fill important roles in tech, healthcare, finance, research
  • Support innovation ecosystems
  • Contribute to startups, patents, and scientific research
  • Help fill shortages in sectors where Americans are not training in sufficient numbers. 

Removal of OPT may lead to:

  1. Talent shortages in key STEM areas
  2. Reduced innovation output
  3. Lower economic growth
  4. More outsourcing to foreign offices
  5. Slower pace of emerging technologies
  6. Loss of global competitiveness in AI, biotech, engineering, and quantum technology

Global migration shift

If OPT ends, the global student flow would shift significantly:

  1. Canada has already expanded its post-study work options.
  2. Australia continues to offer generous work pathways.
  3. Europe (Germany, Netherlands, France) is actively courting STEM students.
  4. Middle Eastern hubs (UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia) are rising rapidly.

The US would lose:

  1. Talent
  2. Tuition revenue
  3. Soft power
  4. Future entrepreneurs
  5. Scientific leadership

Who benefits?

In the short term:

  • Some US job-seekers who compete directly with entry-level OPT candidates
  • Political groups advocating reduced immigration

In the long term:

  • Other countries, whose universities and industries receive global talent that once went to the US.  

Why is OPT being targeted now?

Economic anxiety

For decades, certain groups of workers — particularly in mid-career IT roles — have felt threatened by globalisation and automation. It is politically effective to blame:

  • foreign workers
  • immigration
  • outsourcing

…for economic hardships that actually originate from automation, corporate restructuring, and global competition.

A wider turn toward nationalism

Current US political narratives include:

  • “Protect American jobs”
  • “End cheap foreign labour”
  • “Take back control of our borders”

OPT becomes an easy target — despite being a programme for graduates of American universities, many of whom pay full tuition and contribute significantly.

Identity and cultural anxieties

  • It is difficult to quantify, but not impossible to observe:
  • The US has a large number of successful immigrant professionals from India, China, Iran, Korea, Japan, and other countries.
  • In fields like technology, medicine, academia, and finance, immigrant success is highly visible.

For some Americans, particularly those experiencing economic stagnation, this success may fuel resentment — not strictly racism, but a mixture of economic fear, cultural anxiety, and political scapegoating.  Such sentiments sometimes merge with political messaging, resulting in:

  • Overstated claims that immigrants “take jobs”
  • Calls to restrict student visas
  • Attacks on OPT and H-1B programmes
  • A general shift towards isolationism.

OPT as a symbolic battleground

In reality, OPT accounts for a small portion of the US workforce, but it has become a symbolic issue representing:

  • America’s openness vs. America-first nationalism
  • Innovation vs. job protectionism
  • Globalism vs. isolationism.

All this explains why the programme has suddenly become a political flashpoint in 2025.

What Indian Students Should Do

At this moment (late 2025):

  1. OPT still exists.
  2. No final rule has been issued.
  3. Changes, if any, would take months to implement.
  4. Students graduating in 2026 are very unlikely to be affected.
  5. Long-term students (entering in 2026 or later) should stay informed.

YUNO LEARNING advises…

  • If you have already applied or are close to graduation, STAY CALM — your prospects remain stable.
  • If you are planning to apply for 2026 or 2027 intake, MONITOR policy developments closely.
  • PLAN backup options (Canada, UK, Europe, Australia).
  • EVALUATE universities not just on OPT prospects, but on their global networks, placement record, and industry partnerships.
  • PAY ATTENTION to official DHS announcements, not rumours.

OPT is not dead today — but its future is no longer guaranteed.  For many Indian students, this moment calls for informed decision-making, realistic expectations, and a willingness to adapt. The next year will reveal whether the US remains the world’s top choice for international education, or whether the centre of gravity shifts elsewhere.


 

IN THIS POST