1st lawsuit filed to block new $100,000 H-1B Visa fee
Aaron Stanway
International News Editor
In September 2025, the U.S. government announced a significant new policy affecting the H-1B visa program. Under a presidential proclamation issued on September 19, new H-1B petitions filed after September 21 would require employers to pay a supplemental fee of $100,000 per petition in order for the beneficiary to enter the United States. The administration justified this change by arguing that the H-1B program had been subject to misuse, allowing foreign workers to displace U.S. workers or accept lower wages. Officials described the new fee as a way to shift the program toward “high-skilled, high-paid” employment. The rule applied only to new petitions and not to existing visa holders or renewals filed before that date.
Soon after the policy was announced, it faced an immediate legal challenge. On October 3, 2025, a coalition of unions, employers, and religious organizations filed the first lawsuit seeking to block the $100,000 fee. The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, argued that the proclamation exceeded the president’s legal authority, conflicted with the statute governing the H-1B program, and violated the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing a charge unrelated to actual processing costs.
One of the central claims of the lawsuit is that immigration law allows the government to impose visa fees only to cover the cost of administering the program. The plaintiffs argue that a $100,000 fee bears no reasonable relationship to the true cost of processing an H-1B petition. They also contend that the fee creates a de facto barrier to the entry of foreign professionals, effectively altering Congress’s design of the H-1B program. Instead of a system based on numerical caps and wage protections, the plaintiffs say, the new rule imposes a financial threshold so high that many companies especially start-ups and small firms would be priced out of sponsoring foreign talent.
The implications of this case are far-reaching. The H-1B visa has long been vital to U.S. industries such as technology, engineering, and higher education, helping employers fill specialized positions when qualified domestic workers are scarce. A sudden fee increase of this magnitude could significantly change hiring patterns. Supporters of the fee argue that it will protect U.S. workers and ensure that only firms with serious needs for top-tier talent participate in the program. Critics counter that it will reduce innovation, restrict access to global expertise, and disproportionately harm smaller businesses and research institutions.
The timing and nature of the lawsuit reflect the broader unease surrounding the policy. Because the fee rule was introduced with little notice and limited guidance, employers were left uncertain about how it would be implemented or enforced. The legal challenge represents both a reaction to that uncertainty and a broader question of executive power over immigration programs.
Ultimately, the first lawsuit to block the H-1B fee stands as an important test case. The court’s decision will determine whether the executive branch can impose extraordinary visa surcharges without congressional approval and could set a precedent for how future administrations shape immigration policy through financial measures. Whatever the outcome, the case highlights the ongoing tension between protecting domestic labor interests and maintaining America’s openness to skilled workers from around the world.
Contact Aaron at stanwaaa@shu.edu