Editor’s Note: This article has been submitted by an international student who wishes to remain anonymous for political reasons.

I still remember my first days here at the University of Denver when I came here in the spring of 1999.

The Columbine tragedy was not to happen for another month and 9-11 was unimaginable.

I was high on the feeling of independence, not just from home and parents, but also to experience a new place and a new life on my own terms.

As one of the ‘rites of passage’ to becoming an international student at DU, I, like all international students before and after me had to go through learning the rules and guidelines laid out by what was until recently called the INS, its importance probably only second to the sacred texts that each one of us may follow.

I remember a new student once asking about the rights that he received as part of living here, to which the advisor responded that he and all international students had the same rights and responsibilities as any American citizen.

So why is the U.S. government bent on tracking international students? One must look at this from both sides, the government’s point of view and the student’s point of view.

When a student enters the United States, he/she enters into a contract with the government that contains clauses regarding part or full time status, employment, what program the student will be enrolled in, etc.

These clauses are repeated (endlessly!) at orientation sessions conducted by the university, too.

This contract forms the basis for starting education here. Thousands of students come to the United States every year, which mandates a tracking system to ensure compliance with regulations.

The very occurrence of 9-11 seems to indicate the obvious holes in the prevailing system that called for a new centralized system that was computer-based rather than paper-based.

Enter SEVIS (Student and Exchange Visitor Information System), (a.k.a. dog tag, as my roommate affectionately refers to it), a system implemented across colleges and universities nationwide to track and immediately obtain student records at the scan of a barcode on a SEVIS I-20 (a document issued by the university and certified by the government that endorses the student’s presence in the country).

SEVIS was a system originally devised after the 1993 World Trade Center bombings, and stepped up after 9-11.

The system keeps the latest and real-time record of contact information, part- and full-time status, on-campus employment information, etc; since DU computers directly talk to those of the government every few days.

From my perspective the government has only found a new way of implementing the same old rules, only this time they’re doing it better. This means that students have to be a little more careful about not breaking the same rules they were already following.

But there is a fine line between following the law and overstepping it to the extent that international students should now feel threatened by the same government that they have a contract with, and the same government that is sworn to protect them from harm just like the rest of America.

Simply put, would you threaten a guest that comes into your home without provocation?

Some may argue that the government has no responsibility to protect international students. Still there is the matter of the contract. I mentioned earlier in the article that these students have the same rights and responsibilities as any other American.

So if the average student follows all immigration rules and regulations responsibly, why threaten his/her right to be free by creating such a system? Is it justified to punish so many for even the smallest error just because of the actions of a few?

And let’s not forget, 9-11 happened because visas were issued to the hijackers without the INS conducting background checks on them.

How fair is it to single out students representing specific nationalities, especially Arab/Islamic states, and have them fingerprinted? At a minimum, that’s insulting. At a maximum, that’s a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

DU has already seen declining revenues, thanks to a sagging economy. To add salt to the wound, several students have turned away the opportunity to come here.

This creates a bigger hole in DU’s wallet because a significant chunk of DU’s revenue comes from international students.

All this because everyone feels threatened by the United States. Is this really the home of the free and should it really be this difficult just to get an education?