Duke Faculty and Staff Face Disruption Under H-1B Restrictions

(NORTH CAROLINA, UNITED STATES) Duke University faculty and staff are contending with sweeping H-1B visa restrictions introduced by the Trump administration that include a $100,000 fee for each new H-1B petition, a change they say is already disrupting hiring and pushing international scholars to reconsider their futures in the United States. The fee took effect on September 21, 2025, applies to first-time applicants outside the country, and does not cover extensions or workers already in the U.S. on H-1B status. Departments say the policy has upended plans for the academic year and left researchers and instructors unsure whether they can stay or come to campus at all.

Anonymity has become common among faculty discussing the issue, with one Duke academic describing the past several months as

“deeply destabilizing,”

adding, “We have colleagues who simply cannot afford to stay, and departments are scrambling to fill critical teaching and research roles.” Several faculty and staff began raising concerns with the university’s H-1B processes as early as January 2025, and some say their time at Duke ended because the altered costs and rules made transitions impossible. The new $100,000 fee is a one-time payment tied to new petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025, and is expected to remain in place for at least a year, according to campus guidance.

Duke’s Office of Government Relations has told faculty that the fee applies only to new applicants outside the United States and not to renewals or status changes for those already in the country. That line is crucial, but it has not resolved the thorniest questions for people trying to change employers from inside the U.S., a routine step in the academic job market each summer and fall. Duke Visa Services has warned that federal agencies have not offered clear instructions on whether employer changes inside the country could trigger new fees or different scrutiny, and staff there say they are tracking ongoing legal challenges. As of October 21, 2025, two lawsuits had been filed to test the legality of the proclamation, and administrators here and at other schools are waiting to see whether rules will be stayed or adjusted as the cases move forward.

The early institutional impact is stark. Duke University-Medical Center did not file any labor petitions for H-1B visas in the first three quarters of fiscal year 2025, a lull that university officials and department chairs read as a chilling effect even before the fee formally took hold. Departments that typically bring in postdoctoral scholars and international clinicians say they paused some searches because they could not calculate total costs or timelines with any confidence. Staff in academic units described late-spring and summer recruiting as a moving target, with offers contingent on policies that were revised multiple times in a single semester.

Nationally, peer institutions report similar pressures. Universities such as Duke and Yale employ hundreds of H-1B faculty, researchers, and medical professionals, and the fee has raised concern about whether schools can keep pace in fields that rely on global talent pipelines. Immigration attorneys say rules that change midstream compound the problem.

“Constant regulatory shifts create instability for applicants already navigating a complex process,”

according to the American Immigration Lawyers Association. Departments that were already finalizing course schedules and lab staffing for the fall say they had to revisit decisions repeatedly, a drain on time and funding that cannot easily be recouped during the academic year.

At Duke, faculty and staff have reported

“disruptions due to changes in H-1B visa regulations, including a new $100,000 fee for first-time applicants,”

and say the rules have stoked

“concerns about access to skilled talent and the future of international academic collaboration.”

The everyday impact is not just theoretical. Administrators at the school say people directly affected have described the process as

“chaotic”

and

“financially unfeasible,”

words that capture the uncertainty of trying to budget for a hire when the government has not finalized exactly how the policy applies in common scenarios. Some departments say they lost valued staff in the spring and summer, while others failed to fill open positions by the start of term.

The ripple effect extends well beyond Durham. At Notre Dame, a university spokesperson, Erin Blasko, summarized what many peer schools have told their faculty: “absent clear federal guidelines on the new policy, we have nothing to share at this point.” That gap is especially hard on universities planning years-long research agendas and multi-year grants that depend on steady staffing. Historians, computer scientists, and lab managers with pending cases are counting days and reading policy memos while trying to keep classes and projects on track.

Some academics are asking what the policy aims to achieve at a time when universities say the U.S. needs more trained workers in specialized fields. At Connecticut College, history professor Kris Klein Hernández said,

“If you’re going to charge to bring in outside talent, then there needs to be some sort of program for Americans to get the proper training, then to get hired into the roles that weren’t being filled with Americans in the first place. I don’t see that in the policy.”

Faculty members in departments with chronic shortages say the change could make it harder to run programs at full strength, with knock-on effects for students who depend on specialized faculty for labs, seminars, and advising.

Inside Duke, the administrative guidance mirrors what many universities are now distributing to their departments: the fee applies to first-time H-1B petitions filed for workers abroad; it does not apply to renewals or to individuals who already hold H-1B status in the United States and are extending or changing status internally. Yet even with that baseline, there are edge cases that worry faculty and staff. Researchers and clinicians changing employers within the U.S. are waiting for explicit instructions on whether their transfers are considered “new” under the fee rules. International staff with offers at Duke who are currently outside the U.S. face the most immediate cost exposure, and some departments have postponed onboarding until they can weigh budgets against the steep upfront payment.

The H-1B visa is a temporary work category for specialty occupations that require specific expertise, commonly used by universities for faculty, postdocs, and certain professional staff. For official details on eligibility and procedures, the U.S. government directs applicants and employers to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services: H-1B Specialty Occupations. While the category has long been a linchpin of university hiring, the recent H-1B visa restrictions have introduced variables that schools say they cannot control or predict, especially the unexpected $100,000 fee layered on top of long-standing filing costs and compliance obligations.

The Trump administration’s proclamation accompanying the fee also instructed the Department of Labor to update wage requirements and the Department of Homeland Security to propose changes to the H-1B lottery that would prioritize higher-wage applicants. University associations say the combination of fee hikes and wage prioritization could tilt the system toward private-sector employers with larger hiring budgets. In written comments to federal agencies, the American Council on Education and 53 higher education organizations warned that the changes would

“disrupt international student mobility, delay degree completion, and degrade the U.S. capacity to attract global talent.”

Duke’s government relations team has circulated those concerns to campus leaders as they assess which positions to prioritize and which to leave open.

The timeline has added to the strain. Faculty and staff say they began flagging issues in January 2025, months before the official start date, because rumors of steep fees altered candidate decisions in the middle of interview rounds. By August, some departments had already adjusted course offerings and lab schedules because international candidates withdrew or asked to defer. As the implementation date approached in September 2025, administrators said they faced a patchwork of interpretations about who would be exempt and how to handle transfers. Duke Visa Services has told employees it is monitoring the litigation and any regulatory updates that might clarify the rules, especially for those changing employers inside the country.

The practical consequences show up in uneven ways across campus. Units with limited budgets say a $100,000 fee per hire can consume funds reserved for equipment, travel, or graduate student support, even if the fee is temporary and expected to last at least a year. Staff who manage departmental budgets describe a wary calculus: proceed with a hire and absorb an extraordinary cost, or leave the position vacant and risk burnout for remaining staff and reduced services for students. At Duke University-Medical Center, the absence of H-1B labor petitions in the first three quarters of fiscal year 2025 stands out for a hospital system that typically attracts international clinicians and researchers to fill highly specialized roles.

Legal uncertainty colors much of the debate. As of October 21, 2025, two lawsuits had been filed challenging the proclamation’s legality. Faculty and staff watching those cases say they are keenly aware that court rulings could reshape timelines or definitions that matter to them, such as what counts as a “new” petition when an employee has already lived and worked in the United States for several years. Immigrant workers at Duke who are midstream in their careers say they are reluctant to change jobs or departments, fearing that a move could be misread as a trigger for new fees or delays in their status.

The frustration for many is not only the cost but the timing and uncertainty. Hiring decisions in universities follow a set rhythm, with offers issued months in advance of start dates. The fee’s effective date of September 21, 2025 cut into the early fall onboarding period, colliding with the first weeks of the academic year when students arrive and classes begin. Departments that had promised start dates in August or September faced difficult conversations with candidates abroad who suddenly confronted a $100,000 hurdle. Some accepted delays, others withdrew entirely.

“We have colleagues who simply cannot afford to stay,”

the anonymous Duke faculty member said, describing a chain reaction in which classes were reassigned and research timelines slipped.

Beyond individual departments, university leaders worry about long-term reputational effects. If a campus becomes known as a place where international hires face unusual barriers or unpredictable costs, candidates may look elsewhere, especially in competitive fields. At the same time, domestic students and junior scholars depend on steady faculty rosters for mentoring and progression through programs. The ACE letter’s warning that these policies could

“delay degree completion”

echoes what students in some labs have already experienced after staff departures led to postponed experiments or scaled-back course offerings.

Peer campuses have signaled similar worries, but many are withholding detailed guidance until Washington clarifies the rules. “Absent clear federal guidelines on the new policy, we have nothing to share at this point,” said Erin Blasko of Notre Dame, a comment that mirrors what department chairs at Duke say they have heard from colleagues across the country. Faculty members say they are not opposed to updating rules; they are asking for stable, clear policies that let them plan for a full academic cycle. The American Immigration Lawyers Association’s warning about

“constant regulatory shifts”

resonates in that context, as staff tasked with compliance work through shifting instructions while supporting international employees and their families.

For now, departments at Duke are making case-by-case decisions on open roles, weighing the size of the $100,000 fee, the availability of domestic candidates, and the possibility that litigation could change the environment within months. Some units are doubling down on retention, trying to lock in current staff who are already in the U.S. and not subject to the fee for extensions or internal status changes. Others are revising job postings and timelines to push start dates beyond the current fee horizon, hoping that after a year the policy will be revisited or clarified.

Duke’s experience captures the tension in the broader higher education community, where reliance on global talent meets a shifting policy landscape. The university says it will keep faculty and staff updated as federal agencies issue further guidance and as the lawsuits progress. In the meantime, campus leaders and hiring committees are adjusting plans in real time and bracing for a year in which the cost and complexity of bringing international scholars to the United States have rarely felt higher. The question hanging over the fall recruiting season is whether the combination of H-1B visa restrictions, the $100,000 fee, and unresolved legal questions will fundamentally change how universities like Duke University build their academic teams—or whether clear, consistent rules will arrive in time to steady the system.