(UNITED STATES) A coalition of hospitals, unions, universities, religious groups, and skilled workers has sued to stop the new $100,000 fee on all new H-1B visa petitions for workers outside the United States, arguing the move is unlawful and puts U.S. industries at risk.
Filed on October 3, 2025, in the Northern District of California, the case—Global Nurse Force et al v. Trump et al—challenges President Trump’s proclamation, “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers,” issued September 19, 2025, which took effect September 21, 2025 and is slated to last 12 months unless extended.
Under the policy, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the State Department, and Customs and Border Protection are enforcing a new charge of $100,000 per petition for employers seeking to hire H-1B workers who are currently abroad. The rule applies only to new cases; it does not cover H-1B extensions, amendments, or petitions for workers already inside the country.
According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, employers now face immediate cost decisions when planning cross-border hiring and project timelines that depend on specialized skills.
Policy details and current status
The proclamation—formally titled “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers”—requires employers to pay the $100,000 fee at filing for any new H-1B case where the beneficiary is outside the U.S., or the petition will not be processed.
Plaintiffs say this creates a “pay-to-play” system that blocks smaller employers, especially in healthcare and education, from recruiting needed talent. The government asserts the fee is needed to curb abuse, protect U.S. workers, and address national security concerns, citing alleged wage suppression and fraud within the H-1B program.
As of October 4, 2025, the fee remains in effect. Plaintiffs are seeking emergency court relief to halt enforcement while the case proceeds, but there has been no ruling yet. If the case is delayed, employers may face a full new cap season and ongoing hiring needs with the added six-figure levy.
For reference on program rules, USCIS’s H-1B page outlines the specialty occupation framework and employer obligations: USCIS H-1B Specialty Occupations.
Legal challenge and arguments
The lawsuit raises several core legal claims:
- The proclamation exceeds presidential authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act by reshaping a fee system Congress created and agencies administer.
- The administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing a sweeping financial barrier without notice-and-comment rulemaking.
- The fee is allegedly arbitrary, capricious, and unconstitutional.
- The rule disrupts the statutory H-1B structure Congress designed, which already includes wage rules, caps, anti-fraud checks, and employer attestations.
Supporters of the lawsuit include:
- Global Nurse Force
- Major labor unions: UAW International, American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and SEIU
- Academic and religious organizations
- Individual H-1B professionals
Stakeholder concerns and impacts cited in the complaint:
- Healthcare employers: the fee worsens staffing shortages, particularly in rural and underserved communities.
- Universities and research centers: the fee will shut out international scholars and postdocs, slowing labs and research programs.
- Religious groups: smaller congregations can’t absorb the costs to sponsor ministry staff.
- Small businesses and startups: a per-petition six-figure outlay makes new cross-border hiring unrealistic.
The government defends the policy as a tool to deter misuse, arguing high costs will push employers to hire domestically first. The lawsuit counters that the rule ignores existing protections and punishes good-faith employers while failing to target bad actors.
Plaintiffs are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to block the fee and restore prior H-1B processing for workers abroad.
Impact on employers, workers, and communities
Practical stakes and immediate considerations:
- Effective date: Petitions filed on or after September 21, 2025 for beneficiaries abroad must include the $100,000 fee or they will not be processed.
- Scope: The fee applies to new H-1B cases only—not to extensions, amendments, or petitions for workers already inside the United States.
- Duration: The policy is set for 12 months from the effective date, unless extended.
Key filing forms and resources:
- Employers file H-1B petitions using Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker: USCIS Form I-129
- For beneficiaries outside the U.S., consular processing normally uses Form DS-160: U.S. Department of State DS-160
Under the proclamation, agencies coordinate to ensure the extra fee is assessed and enforced before visa issuance or admission.
Reported operational impacts:
- Employers have canceled offers or delayed projects due to the cost.
- Hospitals report gaps in patient care coverage.
- Schools struggle to fill specialized teaching roles mid-semester.
- Research labs warn of paused experiments and grant delays.
- Startups and small businesses find cross-border hiring unrealistic.
Employers with urgent needs are evaluating stopgaps:
- Shifting work to contractors inside the U.S.
- Spreading tasks among current staff
- Relocating projects abroad
- Exploring alternatives like L-1 intracompany transfers (though these have strict requirements and often do not fit new hires)
Industry groups note the fee does not distinguish between high-wage, high-skill roles and lower-wage positions, so it indiscriminately affects fields central to U.S. competitiveness. Universities caution that hiring delays weaken partnerships and risk pushing research to other destinations. Community health centers worry about reduced services in areas already short on clinicians.
Legal and procedural implications
The legal battle will likely hinge on two main questions:
- Whether the president can impose a massive filing charge through a proclamation aimed at entry when Congress established the fee framework and assigned rulemaking to agencies.
- Whether the government can bypass notice-and-comment for a measure that functions like a new, mandatory fee regime.
Plaintiffs argue the rule is not a narrow entry control but a broad financial barrier that rewrites core parts of the H-1B system.
For now, employers should plan budgets and timelines assuming the $100,000 fee applies to any new cases involving workers abroad. Recommended immediate actions:
- Update internal approvals, offer letters, and vendor contracts to reflect the potential cost exposure.
- Have legal teams document business harms and track spending in case courts order retroactive relief or refunds.
- Consider timing filings or transfers where workers are already inside the U.S., when feasible.
- Consult counsel before filing to confirm whether a case triggers the proclamation and to ensure correct payment procedures.
If the court grants an injunction, agencies would likely issue guidance on treatment of filed cases and refunds, if any. Stakeholders can monitor official updates through agency announcements and court filings.
The administration maintains that the policy protects U.S. workers and national security. Plaintiffs say it harms patients, students, and communities, while clashing with the system Congress built. Until a judge rules, the $100,000 fee stands, reshaping how employers approach H-1B hiring for talent outside the United States under the “Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers.”
This Article in a Nutshell
On October 3, 2025, a coalition including hospitals, unions, universities, religious groups and H-1B professionals sued to block a new $100,000 fee on all new H-1B visa petitions for beneficiaries outside the U.S. The fee was announced in a presidential proclamation on September 19 and took effect September 21, 2025, lasting 12 months unless extended. Plaintiffs argue the fee exceeds presidential authority, violates the Administrative Procedure Act, and unlawfully reshapes Congress’s H-1B framework, harming healthcare, academia, startups and underserved communities. The government defends the fee as a measure to deter abuse and protect U.S. workers. Plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief; as of October 4, 2025, the fee remains in effect while the court considers emergency relief. Employers are advised to budget for the fee, document harms, consult counsel, and consider alternatives such as intracompany transfers or hiring domestic contractors while litigation proceeds.
