Federal Court Strikes Down $100K H-1B Fee

A federal judge struck down the $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas for skilled ‌foreign workers, ruling that it constituted an unlawful tax.

U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston ruled June 8 that Congress never authorized President Donald Trump to impose the fee, declaring it unlawful and vacating it in its entirety.

The court also declared the policy to be in excess of statutory authority, procedurally deficient, arbitrary and capricious, and therefore, unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act.

President Trump had issued the fee in a presidential proclamation Sept. 19, 2025. Judge Sorokin took the position that the fee amounts to a tax, for which only Congress has the authority to levy.

“Here, the substance and application of the $100,000 payment reveal that ​it is a tax, regardless of what the payment is called,” Sorokin wrote.

The judge cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s February ruling striking down President Trump’s sweeping tariffs. Under the logic of the decision in that case, President Trump similarly had no ​authority under immigration law to levy a tax, Sorokin wrote.

The Trump ​administration argued the fee constituted a lawful monetary penalty that the president was authorized to impose under federal immigration law, which gives ​his administration the power to restrict the entry of certain foreign nationals when deemed their entry is “detrimental to the interests of the ⁠United States.”

The presidential proclamation characterized the H-1B program as deliberately designed “to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.”

White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said the Trump administration is confident that the ​ruling will be reversed on appeal.

أسئلة وأجوبة حول الموارد البشرية: التغييرات الرئيسية في تأشيرة H-1B التي يجب على أرباب العمل معرفتها

The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs — 20 state attorneys general — meaning that, for the time being, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is not permitted to collect the $100,000 fee from employers. The court decision does not address the issue of possible refunds for fees already submitted. The ruling has nationwide impact.

الخلفية

The $100,000 fee requirement for H-1B visas, which took effect on Sept. 21, 2025, primarily applies to new H-1B petitions filed on behalf of applicants who are outside the U.S. — a group that makes up a very small percentage of those who file for the visas. The proclamation significantly increased the cost of H-1B petitions, which, prior to the change, typically totaled between $960 and $7,595 in regulatory and statutory fees.

But because the fee does not apply to most petitions, very few employers have paid it. According to a March filing from USCIS, the agency received 85 payments. Some hospitals, universities, and schools have been affected by the supersize fee, however, limiting their ability to hire foreign national teachers, researchers, and medical staff, the plaintiffs argued.

Decision’s Future

Because of uncertainty around the appeals process, employers should be careful about allowing employees to travel, said Ann Lee, an attorney in the Denver office of Holland & Hart. “You wouldn’t want to be caught off guard, stuck outside the country” if the fee is retriggered, she said.

A swift government appeal and further litigation are expected. Employers should also be prepared for a possible stay of the district court decision.

“An appeal will almost certainly be filed immediately by the U.S. government, particularly since there is a contradictory decision from another district court judge upholding the $100,000 fee,” said A. James Vazquez-Azpiri, an attorney in the San Francisco office of Tafapolsky Smith.

In December 2025, a District of Columbia federal judge upheld the fee, rejecting the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s request to block it, and the Chamber appealed the decision to a federal appeals court. That ruling is expected any day now.

“Given the clear split between federal districts over the validity of the $100,000 fee, it is highly likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will take up this matter, and there is certainly no guarantee that it will agree with [the June 8] decision,” Vazquez-Azpiri said.

He added that an appellate court could grant a stay of the June 8 judgment, during which the fee could continue to be imposed.

شهادة تخصص: الهجرة إلى الولايات المتحدة لأغراض العمل

Fee Ruling Follows Separate Litigation  

On June 5, a federal court in Rhode Island vacated a Trump administration policy freezing work permits, green cards, and other benefits for applicants from 39 countries subject to travel bans.

A USCIS policy has blocked work permits and green cards for people from countries deemed “high risk” by the government including Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela, resulting in many people already present in the U.S. losing their jobs and legal status while the hold is in place.

“The court found that USCIS lacked authority to enact these policies and that it acted in an arbitrary manner, finding there was no rational connection between a few isolated criminal incidents and the adjudication of benefits for thousands of unrelated individuals from the travel ban countries,” Vazquez-Azpiri said.

The court decision did not address the underlying travel bans, which remain in effect, he added. But, “any applications or petitions filed with USCIS that have been paused because of these policies should move forward. In addition, USCIS can no longer consider an applicant’s country of origin as a negative factor when deciding cases that allow for agency discretion.”