A federal court has overturned the Trump administration’s controversial decision to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas, delivering a victory to states and employers who challenged the dramatic cost increase.
U.S. District Court Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston ruled Monday in favor of 20 states, determining that the executive branch overstepped its legal boundaries and failed to follow proper federal rulemaking procedures when implementing the fee hike.
“The Court finds that the Policy imposes a tax on H-1B petitions without the requisite delegation by Congress,” Sorokin wrote.
The administration had defended the substantial fee increase as a measure to protect American workers from foreign competition for jobs. Previously, H-1B applications typically cost several thousand dollars, making the new fee structure a massive jump that created widespread confusion and concern among employers and workers.
H-1B visas target positions requiring specialized skills that are challenging to fill with domestic workers. Technology firms represent the largest user group, with approximately three-quarters of approvals granted to workers from India. The challenging states contended that recruiting essential professionals like doctors and teachers through the H-1B system was already problematic before the fee increase took effect.
The legal landscape remains complex, with multiple court cases producing conflicting outcomes. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce filed a separate challenge in Washington, D.C. federal court and has appealed an unfavorable ruling, leaving the higher fee temporarily in place until September 2026. Religious organizations and labor groups have also filed suit in San Francisco federal court, potentially creating conflicting decisions across different appellate circuits.
State officials argued the policy would severely impact their capacity to recruit educators for elementary and secondary schools, staff public universities, support academic research initiatives, and maintain adequate medical personnel levels.
“The Proclamation makes various overtures to domestic economic policy goals to justify the unprecedented $100,000 fee,” plaintiffs wrote in their complaint. “But the Proclamation gives no indication that the President gave any consideration to how the fee would affect Plaintiff States and their ability to provide their residents access to education, healthcare, and other basic human needs.”
The Department of Homeland Security expressed strong disagreement with the court’s decision, characterizing it as inappropriate judicial interference with immigration policy reforms.
“Under President Trump and Secretary Mullin, our immigration system is being reformed to serve American citizens, American workers, and American families and to preserve our national identity — not to rapidly import foreigners who take American jobs, commit crimes, burden our welfare system, and erode our cultural and social fabric,” the agency stated.
