Second Judge Blocks Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee

A second federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration’s attempt to impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa petitions. U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. ruled that the administration bypassed mandatory regulatory procedures, which created a legal setback for the policy.

The court found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) failed to adhere to the notice-and-comment requirements mandated by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). This federal law requires agencies to provide the public with an opportunity to review and comment on proposed regulations before they take effect.

"The administration tried to financially punish companies with an arbitrary, unauthorized, and deeply harmful $100,000 fee imposed without Congress. This decision adds to those protecting workers and communities, and protects a system that was thrown into chaos overnight," said Steve Bressler, senior legal adviser at Democracy Forward.

The Role of the Administrative Procedure Act

The APA serves as the primary mechanism for ensuring transparency in federal rulemaking. By bypassing this process, the administration's $100,000 fee was deemed procedurally flawed. Judge Gilliam’s ruling forces the DHS to initiate a formal rulemaking process if it intends to pursue such a fee in the future. This process includes public feedback and a detailed justification for the costs involved.

This legal challenge is distinct from a separate, ongoing DHS effort to establish a permanent fee structure. The agency has separately proposed a permanent visa fee of approximately $103,265. Unlike the $100,000 fee blocked by the court, the $103,265 proposal is moving through the standard federal rulemaking pipeline.

Impact on Visa Processing

The H-1B program, which allows U.S. employers to hire foreign workers in specialty occupations, has faced uncertainty due to these conflicting fee structures. The injunction prevents the immediate enforcement of the $100,000 charge, providing a reprieve for companies that rely on the visa program to fill technical and specialized roles.

The ruling highlights the tension between executive efforts to alter immigration policy and the procedural safeguards of the federal administrative state. The requirement to complete formal rulemaking ensures that any significant increase in visa costs must be supported by a record that can withstand judicial scrutiny.