A U.S. federal court has blocked the Trump administration’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applications, ruling that the measure exceeded presidential authority and functioned as an unlawful tax. The decision prevents enforcement of the fee for now, though the administration plans to appeal.
What the H-1B fee would have changed
The fee was introduced in September 2025 and raised employer filing costs for a new H-1B application from roughly $2,000–$5,000 to $100,000 per application.
The H-1B visa program is used by U.S. employers to hire highly skilled foreign professionals, particularly in sectors such as:
- technology
- healthcare
- engineering
- research
The program provides 65,000 visas each year, plus an additional 20,000 visas for applicants with advanced degrees from U.S. universities.
The administration argued that the fee would push companies to invest more in American workers and reduce reliance on foreign labour. Critics said it would make it much harder for employers to hire specialised international talent and would weaken U.S. competitiveness.
The fee did not apply to foreign nationals already in the United States on student visas who were transitioning to H-1B status. This group typically represents a significant share of new H-1B recipients each year.
Why the court struck it down
U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin issued the decision in Boston on June 8.
The case was brought by 20 Democratic state attorneys general, who argued that the fee would significantly restrict employers’ access to skilled international workers.
Judge Sorokin found that the fee operated as a tax rather than a lawful regulatory penalty. Because the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the President, authority to impose taxes, the court concluded that the administration lacked legal authority to introduce the measure.
The ruling also reflects broader judicial scrutiny of executive actions that attempt to create major economic or immigration policy changes without explicit congressional approval. Judge Sorokin referenced recent Supreme Court guidance limiting presidential powers in similar contexts.
Impact on employers
The ruling provides immediate relief for employers that rely on skilled foreign workers.
Employers expected to face higher costs included:
- technology companies
- healthcare providers
- universities
- research institutions
Several states argued that the fee would have made it more difficult to attract doctors, scientists, educators, and other specialised professionals.
Court filings suggest the policy had already discouraged applications. As of February 15, 2026, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had received only 85 payments of the $100,000 fee.
That low number suggests many employers may have delayed hiring plans, considered other immigration options, or abandoned applications because of the additional cost.
Appeal expected
The Trump administration has said it intends to challenge the ruling.
White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said the administration remains confident the decision will be reversed on appeal. She argued that President Trump has legal authority to restrict the entry of classes of foreign nationals when he determines such action is in the national interest.
The appeal means the dispute is likely to continue in the coming months. For now, the ruling blocks enforcement of the $100,000 fee, but the final outcome may be decided by higher courts.
Broader H-1B policy changes
The fee was part of a broader effort to reshape the H-1B program.
The administration has also ordered enhanced vetting of H-1B applicants and proposed changes to the visa selection process that would favour higher-skilled and higher-paid workers.
Supporters argue that these measures help ensure the program addresses genuine skills gaps rather than lowering labour costs.
Critics argue that tighter restrictions may make it harder for U.S. employers to compete for global talent, especially in industries where demand for specialised workers exceeds domestic supply.
What it means going forward
The ruling is significant for both employers and foreign professionals considering U.S. career opportunities.
For employers, it removes the immediate burden of the $100,000 fee, but uncertainty remains because the administration is appealing.
For skilled foreign workers, the case highlights the volatility of U.S. employment-based immigration policy, where major changes can be introduced by executive action and later challenged in court.
The dispute also raises broader questions about how countries balance domestic workforce priorities with the need to attract international talent.
Source article: outboundinvestment.com
