Judge strikes down Trump’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas

BOSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Monday struck down the Trump administration’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas, contradicting an earlier federal court ruling upholding the fee increase.

The administration announced the much higher fees as a way to prevent foreign workers from taking American jobs.

But U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston sided with 20 states and struck down the visa policy, concluding that the executive branch had exceeded its authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations.

“The Court finds that the policy imposes a tax on H-1B petitions without the required authorization by Congress,” Sorokin wrote.

H-1B visas are for highly skilled jobs that are difficult to find American workers to fill. Rich tech companies are the biggest users, with nearly three-quarters of approvals going to workers from India. States have argued that using the H-1B program to fill vacancies for much-needed doctors and teachers was already difficult before the fees rose.

Most H-1B visa applications cost several thousand dollars before the announced increase sparked a wave of panic among employers, students and confused workers in the United States and abroad, and led to numerous lawsuits, including in Boston.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also filed a lawsuit in federal court in Washington, D.C., appealing the denial of summary judgment against the fee increase. That leaves the higher fees in effect, at least until September 2026, when they are set to expire. The ruling issued on Monday is also a summary judgment, by contrast. Another lawsuit was filed in federal court in San Francisco, by religious groups and labor organizations, leading to the possibility of splitting rulings in three appeals court circuits.

The states claimed that the policy would hinder their ability to recruit elementary and secondary school teachers and staff public colleges and universities, would hamper academic research and lead to a decline in the number of medical personnel.

“The ad advances various initiatives of domestic economic policy goals to justify the unprecedented $100,000 fee,” the plaintiffs wrote in their complaint. “But the announcement gives no indication that the President gave any consideration to how the tariffs would impact the plaintiff states and their ability to provide their populations with access to education, health care, and other basic human needs.”

A Department of Homeland Security statement said the department disapproves of “this blatant judicial activity that dismantles President Trump’s historic efforts to reform immigration.”

“Under President Trump and Secretary Mullen, our immigration system is being reformed to serve American citizens, American workers, and American families and to preserve our national identity — not the rapid importation of foreigners who take American jobs, commit crimes, burden our welfare system, and erode our cultural and social fabric.”