More stories

  • in

    A textbook Wall Street activism play is unfolding with underperforming software company Virtusa

    A battle heats up between a deep-research investor with a private equity mindset and an underperforming small cap software stock. This is a textbook case of good activism — a company with poor operating history, horrible corporate governance, underperforming stock, overpaid CEO and a large, long-term shareholder with a very friendly and reasonable request with impressive director nominees.

    Company: Virtusa Corp. (VRTU)

    Business: Virtusa’s technology services include information technology (IT) and business consulting, digital enablement services, user experience (UX) design, development of IT applications, maintenance and support services, systems integration, infrastructure and managed services. Its services enable its clients to accelerate business outcomes by consolidating, rationalizing and modernizing the clients’ core customer-facing processes into one or more core systems.
    Stock Market Value: $924 million ($30.67 per share)

    Activist: New Mountain Vantage

    Beneficial Ownership:  8.98%
    Economic Exposure: In addition to the 2,706,161 (8.98%) shares of common stock owned by New Mountain, they have economic exposure, but not voting control, to 540,654 shares underlying cash-settled swaps for a total economic exposure of 3,246,815 shares (10.78%).
    Average Cost: $37.79 per share
    Activist Commentary: New Mountain manages private equity, public equity and credit capital with aggregate assets under management totaling more than $20 billion. It started as a private equity fund but has had a public equities fund for over fourteen years, and manages $1.8 billion. The firm is fundamental, bottoms up, deep-research investors with a private equity mindset and a long-term view. Their style is active shareholders who are very engaged with management, but most of the time privately. This is New Mountain’s first 13D filing in seven years.

    What’s Happening

    On June 17, 2020, New Mountain Vantage nominated the following three director nominees for election to Virtusa’s Board at the 2020 Annual Meeting: (i) Michael Baresich, founder and CEO of New York Tech Advisors, L.L.C., which provides specialized advisory services to technology-focused companies; (ii) Ramakrishna Prasad Chintamaneni, managing director at New Mountain Capital, L.L.C., where he leads the firm’s investment initiatives in digital transformation; and (iii) Patricia “Patty” Morrison, former executive vice president and chief information officer at Cardinal Health, Inc., Motorola, Inc. and Office Depot, Inc.

    Behind the Scenes

    New Mountain began investing in Virtusa in the fall of 2019. On April 29, 2020, New Mountain delivered a presentation to the company including a specific path forward and made a formal request for Board representation for Chintamaneni and Chad Fauser, two New Mountain employees. On June 12th, the company announced that it would appoint an additional independent board candidate with IT services experience, ignoring New Mountain’s request for a board seat, causing New Mountain to escalate its activism publicly with a June 17th letter to the Board.
    In the letter, New Mountain points out, among other things:
    The company’s horrible operating margins (declining from 14.3% in 2015 to 8.7% in 2020, 50% below peers)
    Poor annual EPS growth of only 3% despite annual revenue growth of 22%
    Poor capital allocation decisions, specifically the company’s acquisition of Polaris.
    Corporate governance practices that include a staggered board, co-Chairman/CEO, lack of board diversity and the inability for shareholders to call a special meeting or act by written consent.
    But more importantly, all of this has led to a stock price that has declined by nearly 40% over the last five years while its relevant Russell 3000 peer group has delivered a nearly 70% return all while Virtusa’s CEO’s compensation has grown by 122%. 

    Accordingly, on June 22nd, New Mountain announced its nomination of three director candidates for election to the board at the 2020 Annual Meeting, but is willing to compromise for: (i) Board representation for either Chad Fauser or Prasad Chintamaneni at Virtusa’s choice; (ii) the addition of two mutually agreed upon independent directors, one of which can be sourced by Virtusa and one by New Mountain, (iii) formation of a business optimization committee or task force of the board or the expansion of the scope of the existing finance committee to include developing a detailed margin improvement and revenue diversification plan; and (iv) a commitment to articulate to the market a concrete margin improvement plan and revenue diversification strategy, together with improved communication to investors, analysts and other market participants.
    New Mountain has nominated two directors with industry experience and a New Mountain executive who also has deep industry experience as an operator at Cognizant. When boards and founders see this, they often think someone is coming for their jobs, but that is not New Mountain’s style. This is a case of a company that needs better board oversight that holds management more accountable. With fresh industry executives on the board, they can work with management to improve margins by diversifying revenue stream, walking away from low-margin revenue and better optimizing and managing the employee base. Moreover, an increase in digital revenue could lead to a multiple expansion from approximately 10 times where Virtusa trades today to over 15 times where its closest peers trade. More

  • in

    Here's how to go to college for free

    Crisserbug | Getty Images

    With more Americans under financial pressure due to the coronavirus, paying for college is a growing problem.
    Nearly 70% of families are worried about how they will cover the cost and more than half now say their higher education plans have changed due to Covid-19.

    By necessity, some students will attend a community college close to home or delay going to college altogether.  
    So the possibility of free tuition could make all the difference.
    More from Invest in You:How to borrow money if you are out of optionsCovid-19 changes the game for the parents of college kidsSix strategies to help recent college grads find work right now
    The Community College of Denver recently said it will offer free tuition to all 2020 graduates of Denver public schools, including undocumented students, who meet the requirements for in-state tuition. 
    Connecticut also just announced a tuition-free community college program for 2020. 

    “With the economic effects of the pandemic lingering, the opportunity for individuals to access a community college education is more imperative than ever,” David Levinson, the interim president of Connecticut State Community College, said in a statement.
    The program, called PACT, is open to graduates of a public or private Connecticut high schools who will be first-time college students.

    Historically, community colleges see an influx of students during economic downturns.
    “With the country’s current levels of unemployment, we would expect to see enrollments climb somewhat this fall and even into next year regardless of what states do about making their tuition free,” said Morley Winograd, the president and CEO of the Campaign for Free College Tuition.
    Community college is significantly less expensive than a four-year school. At two-year public schools, tuition and fees are $3,730 for the 2019–2020 school year, according to the College Board. Alternatively, at in-state four-year public schools, tuition is $10,440 and at four-year private universities it averages $36,880.

    Nearly 20 states, including Tennessee, Arkansas, Indiana, Minnesota, Montana, Oregon and Rhode Island, have statewide free community-college programs already in place.
    In those state-based programs, students receive a scholarship for the amount of tuition that is not covered by existing state or federal aid.
    Most, like Connecticut, are “last-dollar” scholarships, meaning the program pays for whatever tuition and fees are left after financial aid and other grants are applied. 
    “Last-dollar” programs require less investment up front, however, it is unlikely that many more states will roll out free college initiatives — at least for now, according to Jennifer Mishory, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, specializing in issues related to workforce and higher education.
    Although state support for higher education rose 5% this year, according to the Center for the Study of Education Policy at Illinois State University, a sharp decline in revenue as a direct result of the pandemic will mean less funding for public higher education institutions going forward.
    “Because of significant budget shortfalls, it makes it less likely states will pursue free college plans, particularly without federal government support,” Mishory said. More

  • in

    Looming evictions may soon make 28 million homeless in U.S., expert says

    A newly erected fence blocks the front of a vacant home that Moms 4 Housing activists occupied during a months-long protest that ended in a court-ordered eviction, in Oakland, California.

    Emily Benfer began her career representing homeless families in Washington, D.C.
    Her first case involved a family that had been evicted after complaining to their landlord about the holes in their roof. One of the times she met with the family, one of the children, a 4-year-old girl, asked her: “Are you really going to help us?” Benfer struggled with how to answer.

    “I’d met them too late,” she said. “I couldn’t stop the eviction. They had already been sleeping on the subway, and in other people’s homes. And you could see the effects it was taking on them.”
    Today, Benfer is a leading expert on evictions. She is the chair of the American Bar Association’s Task Force Committee on Eviction and co-creator of the COVID-19 Housing Policy Scorecard with the Eviction Lab at Princeton University. Throughout the public health crisis, Benfer has been investigating how states are dealing with evictions and sharing what she finds in a public database. 
    CNBC spoke with Benfer about the coming eviction crisis and what can be done to turn it around. The interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
    CNBC: How does the eviction crisis brought on by the pandemic compare with the 2008 housing crisis? 
    EB: We have never seen this extent of eviction in such a truncated amount of time in our history. We can expect this to increase dramatically in the coming weeks and months, especially as the limited support and intervention measures that are in place start to expire. About 10 million people, over a period of years, were displaced from their homes following the foreclosure crisis in 2008. We’re looking at 20 million to 28 million people in this moment, between now and September, facing eviction.

    Emily Benfer
    Source: Emily Benfer

    CNBC: You study the intersection of housing and health. What will all these evictions mean for people’s health during the pandemic? 
    EB: Eviction negatively impacts the trajectory of an individual’s life, and it can do that in a permanent way. Studies have demonstrated that eviction causes increased mortality and causes respiratory distress, which in the Covid-19 pandemic can put people in even greater peril. It results in depression, suicides and other poor health outcomes. And the primary response to Covid-19 has been to shelter in place. If there’s an increase in homelessness [one economist estimates homelessness could rise by more than 40% this year], that could spread the virus.
    CNBC: You’ve been keeping track of what states are doing to protect tenants, mostly through eviction moratoriums. How do you feel about the efforts have fallen short? 
    EB: Some of the moratoriums are limited to different segments of the population, and in their duration. They were also not coupled with financial assistance to ensure that renters don’t accrue this backed-up debt and are stabilized enough to stay in their unit. Another issue is that in some states, landlords were allowed to go forward with a hearing on eviction, and even receive an order of eviction, and it was only forestalled at the execution stage. That means that there are a number of evictions that are just waiting for the sheriffs to execute. The moment the moratoriums lifted, all of those families will be immediately put out. And right now, 29 states lack any state level moratorium against evictions. 
    CNBC: Because of the pandemic, a lot of these evictions are unfolding over video or phone instead of in a courtroom. What are the issues that come up here?
    EB: Even prior to the pandemic, the system was very challenging for tenants to navigate and to raise their rights — 90% of tenants across the country are unrepresented. When you consider that people are now choosing between rent and food for their families, they’re also unlikely to be able to pay for minutes on their phone, or Wi-Fi, to log into a remote hearing. So appearance itself may be very challenging. And if they fail to appear, if they weren’t able to dial in or if they don’t have the right link to the Zoom, that’s considered a failure to appear, which results in a default judgment for the property owner.
    CNBC: What can be done to make this eviction crisis less devastating? 
    EB: As an immediate measure, we need a nationwide uniform moratorium on eviction, and it has to be coupled with financial assistance to ensure that the renter can stay housed without shifting the debt burden onto the property owner. The owners that are the most likely to be affected by the eviction crisis right now are those who have small properties and don’t have the financial cushion to make ends meet over a period of months when they’re not receiving that rent. Once that’s in place, we really need to start addressing the root causes of the eviction crisis and the lack of affordable housing.
    More from Personal Finance:Fewer Americans may get a second stimulus checkYour income took a hit. Now what?Households need those tax refunds to cover rent More

  • in

    Tapping into retirement savings doesn't have to be 'the end of the world.' How to decide if it's right for you

    Morsa Images

    If your income has taken a hit during the coronavirus pandemic, you may be trying to figure out ways to bring in some cash.
    One option is to tap  your 401(k) plan or individual retirement account under the new rules enacted in the federal coronavirus stimulus package, or CARES Act.

    Experts often say  taking money from your retirement account is a “last resort,” but these days it may be a lifeline to those who have been impacted by the crisis.
    “There is a real clear need for people to tap into whatever resource they have so they can continue to pay bills,” said Nathan Voris, senior managing director of business strategy at Schwab Retirement Plan Services.
    In fact, 27% of those working or recently unemployed have already taken a withdrawal from their retirement savings accounts or plan to use them as a source of income, according to a May survey by Bankrate.
    The CARES Act allows those impacted by Covid-19 to take distributions from employer-sponsored 401(k) or 403(b) plans, as well as IRAs, without being penalized. Typically, if you take a distribution before you turn 59½, you are hit with a 10% penalty. Under the new legislation, you’ll still owe income tax on the money, but it can be spread over three years. If you repay the money within that time period, you can avoid the tax.

    You can also take out a loan from your 401(k). Under normal circumstances, you can take up to $50,000 or 50% of your vested account, whichever is less. The CARES Act temporarily upped that to $100,000 or 100% of your vested account, whichever is less.

    Whether or not it is the right move for you depends on your circumstances.
    “It really comes down to a lot of personal preference and personal situation,” Voris said.
    “It is not always bad,” he added. “Many times this is the only bucket of money for an individual, or certainly the largest, and access to that is important.”
    Here’s what you need to know before you tap your retirement savings.

    Determine your needs

    First, take a look at your budget.
    “Start with the income coming in and put down all of your absolutely necessary expenses, such as rent, car payment, health insurance, loans and food,” said Chad Parks, founder and CEO of Ubiquity Retirement + Savings.

    Getty Images

    If you have a negative balance and don’t expect a change in situation anytime in the near future, then come up with what you’ll need to get by for six to nine months, he advises.
    So, so if you have a $1,000 a month deficit, plan on borrowing $6,000 to $9,000.

    Make sure your plan allows it

    There is no guarantee that your employer-sponsored 401(k) plan will allow coronavirus-related distributions. Check to make sure your plan is offering the feature, said Voris.
    Nearly two-thirds (63.5%) of plan sponsors are allowing participants to take the distributions, according to a recent survey by the Plan Sponsor Council of America. However, only 36.5% have increased loan amounts to $100,000 or 100% of the vested account. The organization polled plan sponsors June 2 to 16 and received responses from 137 companies.

    CARES Act restrictions

    In order to take the distribution or the increased loan amount, you or your family must be financially impacted by Covid-19.
    That means either you, your spouse or dependents have been diagnosed with the disease, or you are experiencing “adverse financial consequences” as a result of being quarantined, furloughed, laid off or having had your hours reduced. It also applies to those who have been unable to work because of lack of child care or if you had to close or reduce the hours of your business.

    Many times this is the only bucket of money for an individual, or certainly the largest, and access to that is important.

    Nathan Voris
    senior managing director of business strategy at Schwab Retirement Plan Services

    Recently, the IRS recently expanded eligibility. If you have had a job offer rescinded or the start date pushed back due to the virus, you can also now take a withdrawal. Additionally, if your spouse has lost a job or a job offer, you may take the distribution.  

    Distribution vs. loan

    If you qualify, a distribution will give you more flexibility over a loan, Voris noted.
    Most of Schwab’s clients, 98%, have not taken any action since the first quarter. However, those who did chose a distribution over a loan.
    “The flexibility allows you to pay it all, or some, back and spread out tax liability over multiple years,” Voris said.
    “It is a good option for someone who is looking to plug a hole.”
    More from Invest in You:How the coronavirus pandemic could lead to a bigger retirement nest eggCan’t pay your taxes? Don’t panic — here’s what to doLooking to refinance and save money? How to find out if it’s right for you
    If you need a more structured repayment system, consider a loan.
    The same goes if you don’t qualify for a coronavirus-related distribution, since you’ll be penalized for any withdrawals you make if you are under 59½. (Unless you left your job, in which case you won’t be penalized if you are 55 or older). In this case, you’ll be subject to the traditional loan limits of $50,000 or 50% of your vested amount, whichever is less.

    Beware of pitfalls

    If you take a distribution and don’t pay it back, that is less money for retirement. You’ll lose out on compound interest growth, which is your interest earning interest.
    Many people often lower the automatic contributions to their 401(k) plans when taking out a loan, Voris pointed out. That will lower your savings rate over time.
    “That can have a real negative impact over a number of years on the income you’ll be able generate for retirement,” he said.

    There is also the possibility of defaulting. If you leave your job, you’ll have to make good on the balance, typically within a tight time frame. If you fail to pay it back, the loan will then be considered a distribution. It won’t convert to a coronavirus-related distribution and you’ll pay the 10% penalty.
    “Unless you have good job security and you know for sure that nothing is going to happen, I tell people to be very cautious taking 401(k) loans,” Parks said.

    Seek advice More

  • in

    Some prices go up every year. That doesn't mean you have to pay those increases


    Your insurance is up for renewal. Your cell phone contract could be coming to an end after a few years. Cable rates rise as regularly as the sun.
    Once or twice a year, the clock resets on various contracts. And there’s one thing you can pretty much count on.

    “Prices go up without fail,” said Dave Totah, a certified financial planner and senior wealth advisor at Exencial Wealth Advisors, in Plano, Texas. “You have to watch out for expense-creep.”
    It is, however, possible to fight back. In exchange for some phone time, you could save on a number of services.
    More from Invest in You:Not a saver? Learn these skills and end your year with a nice stashMillennials want Gen Z to learn from their mistakesIf you need cash, try these less-obvious sources
    It’s worth the effort, because those annual increases can add up significantly. When it comes to building wealth, sometimes it’s smaller amounts that get in the way, says Brent Weiss, a CFP and co-founder at advisory firm Facet Wealth in Baltimore.
    Cutting a monthly subscription here or lowering a bill there can lead to big improvements in your finances.

    Hit the pause button on the following three services when it comes time to renew. You might be able to get a cheaper rate.

    1. Cheaper driving

    “You should never just renew your [car insurance] policy without reviewing costs and benefits,” said Sa El, a licensed independent insurance agent and co-founder of a credit information and review site in Atlanta.
    El regularly comparison shops his own auto coverage. When rates increase, he wants to know if another insurer will offer the same coverage for less. El also looks to see if another insurer will offer more coverage for the same price as his new, higher rate.
    He’s used three different companies to keep his rates low.

    2. Save on home insurance

    Keep in mind that insurance is regulated by the state you live in, so it’s not simply a matter of asking for a lower rate, El says.
    Research to see what options you do and don’t need, and find the company offering that at the lowest cost.
    Few people actually shop for home insurance, El says. “Three-quarters go with the coverage suggested by their agent or mortgage broker,” he said. “This means that the opportunity for saving on your home insurance is super-high.”
    For instance, some people are actually insured for things they may not even own.
    “[Sometimes] their policies are dated and don’t cover them for things like a home office or data protection,” he said. “If you don’t know what your policy covers, you are in a losing battle and probably losing money.” 

    3. Threaten your cable company

    10’000 Hours

    Consider negotiating the cost of your monthly cable bill.
    “After your first year, the [cable] bill jumps,” Weiss said. Most of the time, people simply accept the rate increase.
    If you still want cable because you’re not ready to cut the cord, Weiss recommends telling your provider you’re going to switch to a competitor unless it can do better on the monthly price.
    Do your research and see what the competition offers. Then speak with your provider’s retention or loyalty department and see what they’ll offer to keep you from canceling. More

  • in

    Fewer Americans may get a second stimulus check. What we know about the next round of payments

    Employee Linda Tarkenton holds a blank U.S. Treasury check before it’s run through a printer at the U.S. Treasury printing facility in Philadelphia.
    Getty Images

    Another batch of one-time stimulus checks could be coming. But this time, far fewer Americans could get paid.
    President Donald Trump has made it clear that he wants to include another batch of checks in the next coronavirus legislation.

    But Senate Republicans have been slow to warm to the idea. One reason: the high cost of cutting millions of checks to Americans.
    Now, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., is considering a compromise: disbursing funds to people making $40,000 or less a year.
    More from Personal Finance:12 million are at risk of not getting their stimulus paymentsHow much money the next coronavirus relief bill could give Americans  What unemployment benefits will look like without that extra $600 a week
    The new threshold would dramatically reduce the number of Americans eligible for the checks. That would help the GOP keep the new spending package to about $1 trillion.
    Congress is poised to consider the issue when it returns later this month. At that time, it will also consider whether or not to continue giving unemployed Americans an additional $600 per week in unemployment benefits.

    The first round of stimulus payments was authorized by Congress with the $2 trillion CARES Act. The stimulus checks amounted to about $300 billion of that spending.
    The U.S. government has sent about 160 million payments worth $269 billion, according to a June Government Accountability Office report.

    Those $1,200 payments went to individuals making up to $75,000 and couples earning up to $150,000 per year. The amount was then reduced incrementally for incomes up to $99,000 for individuals and $198,000 for couples, above which it was completely phased out.
    In a CNBC interview on Thursday, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin declined to comment on the proposed $40,000 threshold.
    “We do support another round of economic impact payments,” Mnuchin said. “The level and criteria we’ll be discussing with the Senate.”
    Though a $40,000 cap would leave millions of Americans out in the cold, it would target a segment of the population that’s been hard hit by the crisis.

    In March, 40% of households making less than $40,000 lost their jobs, according to data from the Federal Reserve.
    And some low-income individuals and families have proven difficult to reach. If they do not typically file tax returns or receive federal benefits, they may not be on the U.S. government’s radar.
    As many as 12 million people are still at risk of not receiving even their first stimulus check for that reason, according to research from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research and policy institute.
    “It’s right that we should target people at lower incomes,” said Kris Cox, senior tax policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “But we need to make sure they’re actually able to receive their payments.”
    Chuck Marr, director of federal tax policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said it is “really heartening” that McConnell “identified the problem” that low-wage workers have been hit the hardest.
    Still, there are other areas in which the government should focus first, Marr said, including making sure there is robust unemployment insurance, adequate Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits for people who need food, and shoring up state and local government budgets.
    “That’s the things you really want to emphasize,” Marr said. More

  • in

    She just started her doctorate in physics. Now she's worried she could be deported

    Michelle Wang
    Source: Michelle Wang

    On July 1, Michelle Wang moved from San Diego to Atlanta to begin her doctorate program in physics at Emory University. Less than a week after she settled into her new apartment, she heard the news: International students will have to leave the U.S. if all their classes are taught online.
    “I can’t just leave,” Wang, 21, said. “It would ruin my life.”

    There are almost 1.1 million international students in the U.S., according to higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz. “This is an incredibly cruel policy change and seems intended to pressure colleges into re-opening,” Kantrowitz said. Harvard and MIT have already sued the Department of Homeland Security over its decision. 
    Wang was 12 when she moved to the U.S. from China with her mother, who taught Chinese to students at the San Diego High School of International Studies. Eventually, her mother returned to China, but Wang decided to stay in the United States to pursue a career in science. The University of San Diego offered her a generous scholarship to attend.
    More from Personal Finance:Here’s what you need to know about creating a willWhere to get your tax return done for freeHow to handle Medicare cover when you move
    “After my mother left, it wasn’t as scary as I thought it would be,” Wang said. “I was able to make a lot of friends and school kept me really busy.”
    As an undergraduate student, she studied physics and attended conferences and got her research published in scientific journals. “I love how we’ve been studying physics for hundreds of years, and still we only know 5% of the universe,” Wang said. “There’s always more to learn.”

    Wang is also a singer and songwriter.
    “I created my entire music career in the U.S.,” she said. “I was able to record an album, and put it on Spotify, and play at open mics or coffee shops.”
    “If I were to move to China, I can’t do that,” she added. “All my songs are in English.” During college, she often sang the national anthem at basketball and football games. 

    Wang knew she wanted to continue studying physics, and applied to graduate programs in her senior year. “Being able to contribute to the science community is beautiful, especially as a woman,” she said. “We’re really underrepresented.”
    Wang said she’s interested in working toward energy-saving solutions, “something that could benefit the entire planet — not just one country or group of people.” 
    Her five-year doctorate program at Emory University is supposed to start in August. Most of her excitement has now turned to fear.

    Michelle Wang
    Source: Michelle Wang

    Wang has been told her classes will be in-person, but she worries that could change at any minute. Coronavirus cases are on the rise in Georgia, and nearly 100,000 people have fallen ill there.
    “If one of us gets Covid, then we’re all screwed,” she said. And there will also be periods of her program where she’s not enrolled in any courses and only doing research. How will the policy impact her then? “I feel threatened,” she said. 
    If Wang was forced to return to China, she doubts she’d be able to continue her doctorate program remotely, with the time difference between the two countries and the fact that Google is banned in China. 
    “I would get very depressed,” Wang said. “I’m going to have to give up everything, the people I care about and my career as a physicist.” 
    The Department of Homeland Security did not immediately respond to a request for comment.  More

  • in

    UC will sue Trump administration over international student ban, joining Harvard, MIT

    The University of California announced plans to sue the government over a policy that could bar international students from studying in the U.S. The move comes on the heels of a joint lawsuit filed by Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology against the Trump administration.
    The guidelines issued Monday by Immigration and Customs Enforcement would bar international students from staying in the country if they attend a school that offers only online courses during the coronavirus crisis.

    Students who are enrolled in online programs “must depart the country or take other measures, such as transferring to a school with in-person instruction,” federal immigration authorities said.
    More from Personal Finance:Harvard, MIT sue Trump administration over student visa ruleNew rules for international students could cost colleges billionsPost-pandemic, remote learning could be here to stay
    The University of California said it will seek a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctive relief to prevent ICE from enforcing the order, which UC President Janet Napolitano said was “mean-spirited, arbitrary and damaging to America.”  
    The announcement came on Wednesday, shortly after MIT and Harvard jointly filed suit against ICE and the Department of Homeland Security in federal court in Massachusetts.
    Like Harvard, the California State University System had previously determined that all students, enrolled on 23 campuses, will take fall classes online.

    “The safety of our students and the campus community is our paramount concern and guides what we do,” Napolitano said in a statement.

    “The idea that the federal government would add to the burden of students and universities working to navigate this global health crisis beggars belief,” the statement continued. “UC will fight this blatant disregard for the law and public health with all the legal means at our disposal.”
    “Other schools depend on these heavy hitters to contest the policy,” said Abigail Boggs, assistant professor of sociology at Wesleyan University.
    Meanwhile, additional efforts to meet the new federal regulations are also in the works, Boggs said, from developing one-off classes that will have an in-person component to individualized tutorials with students.
    All of which “put an huge onus on faculty and students,” she added.
    Subscribe to CNBC on YouTube. More