A federal judge has struck down the Trump administration's $100,000 H-1B visa petition fee, ruling that it exceeded executive authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The decision eliminates one of the most aggressive recent attempts to reshape the H-1B program through financial barriers rather than congressional legislation.
U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin found that the fee operated as a tax imposed without congressional authorization, rejecting the government's argument that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allows the President broad discretion to impose monetary conditions on entry. The court held that statutory authority to impose "restrictions" on entry does not extend to revenue-raising measures and emphasized that the taxing power remains "core to Congress."
The policy stemmed from a September 2025 presidential proclamation invoking authority under the INA to impose new conditions on the entry of certain foreign workers. The administration framed the measure as a response to perceived systemic abuse of the H-1B program and as a way to prioritize higher-paid, higher-skilled workers while discouraging wage suppression and labor market displacement.
The lawsuit was brought by a coalition of state attorneys general, led by California, joined by industry groups and higher education institutions. Plaintiffs argued the fee functioned as an unconstitutional tax and unlawfully expanded executive authority into an area reserved for Congress.
In response to the ruling, the White House signaled it would appeal, defending the fee as a lawful exercise of presidential authority under immigration statutes aimed at protecting U.S. workers and addressing visa abuse concerns. Administration officials described the decision as an improper intrusion into executive immigration authority and maintained the policy was intended to recalibrate incentives within the H-1B system rather than operate as a tax.
H-1B visas are temporary U.S. work visas that allow employers to hire foreign professionals in specialty occupations, including technology, engineering and health care roles.
The ruling removes a substantial cost barrier for employers that had warned the policy would make H-1B sponsorship economically impractical in many cases, particularly for smaller organizations and public institutions. The decision restores the prior regulatory framework governing H-1B filings and returns the program to a traditional fee-based structure rather than a high-cost entry surcharge.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.