DOJ Probes H-1B Hiring Bias Under Dhillon as Cases Grow

(UNITED STATES) The U.S. Department of Justice is expanding probes into alleged hiring bias tied to the H-1B visa program, with Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet K. Dhillon urging whistleblowers to come forward as the number of open matters grows. As of August 29, 2025, the Civil Rights Division’s Immigrant and Employee Rights section is pursuing multiple investigations into employers suspected of favoring foreign H-1B workers over American candidates, a practice that can violate federal civil rights laws. Officials say the list of companies under review continues to expand, and some enforcement actions have already been taken.

The focus of the federal effort is straightforward: whether businesses are giving preference to H-1B visa holders in ways that sideline U.S. workers, including citizens and permanent residents. The Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division has asked anyone with information—employees, job seekers, and recruiters—to report possible violations so investigators can examine patterns in job postings, applicant screening, and hiring decisions.

The department directs complaints and tips through the Immigrant and Employee Rights section, which handles discrimination claims involving citizenship status and national origin. For reporting guidance and contact information, readers can consult the DOJ’s Immigrant and Employee Rights section at the Civil Rights Division’s official page: Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (DOJ).

Coordination with the EEOC and High-Profile Concerns

The enforcement push dovetails with warnings from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). On February 19, 2025, EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas said the agency is seeing widespread unlawful bias against American workers based on national origin and will increase enforcement to protect all workers, including Americans.

The EEOC has spotlighted high-profile cases in the technology sector, where lawsuits contend that employers—including Meta, Facebook’s parent—systematically preferred H-1B candidates to cut labor costs. According to the EEOC, steering jobs away from U.S. workers due to their national origin or citizenship status can amount to illegal discrimination.

Dhillon’s View and the H-1B Context

Dhillon, an Indian-American attorney and former Trump administration official, has described the current H-1B framework as “broken,” noting that it can leave visa holders dependent on their employers for status. She says that dependency may invite exploitation and create unfair hiring advantages in certain markets.

She has called for reforms that protect American workers while also acknowledging that the United States relies on foreign professionals in fields where employers report shortages, including healthcare.

At its core, the H-1B visa permits U.S. employers to hire foreign professionals in specialty jobs, with an annual cap of 85,000 new visas (renewals not included). The program has critics and supporters:

• Critics argue some companies use it to limit chances for native-born workers and to pressure wages.
• Supporters say the H-1B pool helps fill jobs that would otherwise go unfilled, aiding sectors that need advanced skills.

Dhillon has linked the H-1B debate to the physician shortage, particularly in rural and underserved communities. She supports bringing in foreign-trained doctors on H-1B visas to meet urgent care needs while also calling for fixes in medical education and residency capacity so the country can train more homegrown physicians.

Congressman Greg Murphy, a Republican and a physician, has echoed that view, framing H-1B hiring in healthcare as a stopgap that helps hospitals staff essential roles.

Scope of Federal Probes and Employer Exposure

Justice Department investigators and EEOC staff use familiar tools:

• Document requests
• Witness interviews
• Reviews of hiring data and policies

They look for patterns such as:

• Job ads that appear to prefer H-1B candidates
• Recruiting practices that screen out U.S. workers
• Internal hiring rules that tilt opportunities toward temporary visa holders

If investigators find violations, the DOJ can pursue multiple remedies:

1. Settlements
2. Fines
3. Mandatory training
4. Policy changes
5. Lawsuits that may lead to court judgments or consent decrees requiring future compliance

For employers, this means higher scrutiny and legal risk. Companies should expect more questions about:

• How they write job posts
• How they source talent
• How they choose among finalists

Practices that treat visa status or national origin as a shortcut in hiring decisions are drawing closer review. According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, employers across multiple sectors are reassessing hiring plans and internal controls as these probes advance, seeking to reduce exposure and build consistent, lawful hiring steps.

The wave of enforcement is already affecting how companies plan for staffing cycles tied to the H-1B calendar. While the government has not announced new deadlines, the investigations can create downstream effects:

• More careful employer audits
• Closer checks on wage and labor terms
• Adjustments in recruiting timelines

In the near term, many firms are turning to HR training and internal audits to confirm that U.S. workers get full and fair consideration.

Impact on H-1B Professionals, American Workers, and Employers

For H-1B professionals and applicants, stricter oversight can mean:

• Additional vetting around job offers and conditions
• Potential delays or tighter wage and labor checks when an employer is under review
• Uncertainty if an employer reshapes hiring plans or withdraws offers

Example: A software engineer on H-1B who accepts a role may discover that the employer is updating policies due to an active inquiry; start dates can move and onboarding may include extra review steps.

For American workers, enforcement may improve access to open roles as agencies press companies to remove biased filters and consider U.S. applicants on the same terms as foreign candidates. Job seekers who suspect unfair screening can now point to a clear federal message: national origin discrimination, including favoritism toward H-1B candidates over Americans, is illegal.

The EEOC’s stance signals readiness to bring cases where patterns of exclusion appear in hiring data.

How to Report Possible Discrimination

Federal officials emphasize that workers and employers both play a role in fixing biased practices. They outline a straightforward path for bringing concerns forward:

1. Reporting
   • Individuals who believe they have seen discriminatory hiring tied to visa status or national origin can report to the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division or the EEOC.
   • The DOJ’s Immigrant and Employee Rights section provides complaint options and contact details on its site: Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (DOJ).
2. Investigation
   • Agencies may review employer policies, interview witnesses, and analyze hiring data to check for patterns that disadvantage U.S. workers in favor of H-1B visa holders.
3. Enforcement
   • If violations are found, officials can seek settlements, fines, training, and policy changes to stop the bias and prevent repeat issues.
4. Legal proceedings
   • In some cases, the government may file lawsuits, which can lead to court judgments or consent decrees requiring ongoing monitoring.

Employers are being advised to take practical steps to reduce risk:

• Write neutral job ads that do not favor visa holders over U.S. workers.
• Use consistent, documented screening rules for all applicants.
• Train recruiters and hiring managers on federal anti-discrimination rules.
• Keep clear records of fair recruitment steps.

Important: Save evidence. Job seekers who suspect unfair screening should keep job ads, emails, and messages that appear to exclude Americans.

The Broader Debate and What’s Next

The investigations arrive amid heated debate about balancing worker protection and labor supply. Dhillon’s calls for reform underscore that the government wants to tackle both sides: reducing unfair treatment of U.S. workers while keeping critical pipelines open in areas like healthcare.

• Supporters of enforcement argue that strong cases against violators will set guardrails and deter abuses.
• Business groups counter that employers use the H-1B system to fill true gaps in technical fields and aim to comply with the law.

Those overlapping views play out in enforcement files, where investigators sort genuine labor needs from patterns that cross legal lines.

Looking ahead:

• The DOJ and EEOC are expected to keep adding cases through 2025 and beyond.
• Policy watchers anticipate proposals targeting repeated problem areas surfaced by the probes—especially recruiting practices that funnel applicants by visa status.
• The government has not released a timeline for rulemaking, but the agencies’ posture suggests more investigations and more enforcement actions are likely as the year continues.

Practical Advice for Stakeholders

For job seekers:
– Apply broadly and document experiences that feel discriminatory.
– Save job ads, emails, and other communications that could show bias.

For H-1B workers:
– Stay in close contact with employers during hiring or transfers, as internal reviews can affect start dates and role details.

For employers:
– Confirm that compliance teams and recruiters are aligned with federal law and the Civil Rights Division’s expectations.
– Consider conducting internal audits and refresher training now to reduce risk.

The stakes are high for all involved. For an American engineer who suspects a job was steered away due to nationality, a clear reporting path offers a chance to be heard. For a hospital in an underserved area, the aim is to lawfully fill shifts while giving full and fair consideration to U.S. applicants. For H-1B professionals, consistent rules help ensure selection based on skills rather than policy-driven advantage.

As Dhillon’s team continues its work and the EEOC keeps up its warnings, the core point remains simple: hiring should be fair, job-related, and free of bias—no matter a candidate’s origin or status.