The H-1B visa program was created by Congress to help U.S. based employers attract highly skilled professionals — such as doctors, nurses, engineers, teachers, and researchers — from around the globe to fill specialized jobs and urgent needs in the economy. On September 19, 2025, without warning, President Trump issued a Proclamation restricting entry into the United States of workers on H-1B visas and conditioning the entry on their employers making a $100,000 “payment” to the federal government on any new H-1B petition. This requirement took effect less than 36 hours after the Proclamation’s issuance, at 12:01 am ET on September 21, 2025.
Plaintiffs—Global Nurse Force; Global Village Academy Collaborative; Society of the Divine Word; the Fathers of St. Charles; Church on the Hill; International Union; United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW International); UAW Local 4811; American Association of University Professors (AAUP); Committee of Interns and Residents, SEIU (CIR), a citizen of the United Kingdom residing in the Appalachia region, and a citizen of India residing in the Northern District of California—filed this lawsuit challenging President Trump’s Proclamation and implementation of this $100,000 fee on new H-1B petitions. Plaintiffs are represented by Justice Action Center, Democracy Forward, the South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO), Kuck Baxter LLC, Joseph & Hall, P.C., and IMMpact Litigation.
Plaintiffs argue that the President’s Proclamation and the administration’s imposition of the $100,000 fee requirement is unlawful because it violates the relevant statutes and framework Congress put in place for the H-1B visa system, failed to consider several important factors and the impact, and failed to go through the proper procedures of rulemaking.
On December 18, 2025, the coalition filed a motion for preliminary injunction, asking the court to pause enforcement of the fee, and to certify class of employers harmed by the fee so relief applies broadly and uniformly.
Technical Summary
Plaintiffs allege APA claims based on the President and his administration's actions being: 1) ultra vires in violation of INA § 212(f), 215(a)m 1182(f); 2) not in accordance with law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA); 3) arbitrary and capricious in violation of the APA; and 4) in violation of notice and comment rulemaking requirements. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief.
Latest Updates
- 12/18/2025
- 10/03/2025
