A federal court in Massachusetts has ruled against the Trump Administration’s $100,000 H-1B fee proclamation in a case brought by twenty states challenging the government’s attempt to require employers to pay $100,000 for certain new H-1B petitions. The court ruled that the policy was unlawful and vacated the agency action implementing it. This decision turns on a critical constitutional principle: the court found that the fee is actually a tax—and taxes must come from Congress, not the President.
What changed
The court did not treat the $100,000 charge as a normal immigration filing fee. The court said, “the $100,000 payment requirement amounts to a tax, not a penalty,” and that distinction matters because taxes are controlled by Congress, not the President.
The government argued that the President had broad authority under INA Section 212(f) and Section 215(a) to restrict the entry of foreign nationals. The court stated that “INA §§ 212(f) and 215(a) do not delegate Congress’s taxing power,” explaining that while the President may have broad authority to restrict entry in certain circumstances, that does not mean he can impose a $100,000 tax on H-1B employers.
The court found that the President has no authority to levy a tax unless such a power is delegated by Congress through statute, and because Congress did not delegate that power here, the court concluded that “the Policy imposes a tax on H-1B petitions without the requisite delegation by Congress.” The court also found violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, noting that the agencies did not go through proper notice-and-comment rulemaking before implementing this major new requirement.
The court also held that the agencies exceeded their authority, stating that “Defendants’ actions in issuing the Policy exceeded their statutory authority in violation of the APA.”
Why it matters
The $100,000 fee is now blocked. If you are an H-1B employer or counsel representing H-1B beneficiaries, you should not expect USCIS to collect this fee under the vacated proclamation. However, this victory may be temporary. The court’s judgment is a victory for employers and H-1B workers, but the battle may move to the Court of Appeals, and practitioners should not become complacent about the litigation.
The court emphasized that “Hiring workers pursuant to the H-1B program is plainly lawful” because the H-1B program was created by Congress and remains part of U.S. immigration law, and a President cannot practically destroy a congressionally created program by adding an unauthorized financial barrier. This reasoning protects the statutory program against further executive attempts to impose financial barriers without congressional action.
Way forward
- Verify current fee requirements: Check USCIS’s H-1B fee schedule to confirm which fees now apply for any new filings. Do not assume the $100,000 charge is still in effect.
- Monitor the appeal: Expect the government to appeal this decision. Keep watch on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit for any stay or reversal; this ruling is not final until appeals are exhausted.
- Resume H-1B planning: If you suspended H-1B planning or filings while the $100,000 fee was in effect, you can now advise clients to move forward with standard fee estimates based on existing statutory fees.
- Document the ruling: In client files, note the date and court of this decision and the fact that the fee was vacated. If a government official later attempts to collect the $100,000 fee, you will have clear authority to challenge it.
Disclaimer
This article is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Fola is a software company and not a law firm. The interpretation of court decisions and their application to specific fact patterns require the advice of a licensed immigration attorney. Policy can change without notice—including through appeal or reversal of court decisions—so verify all information against the primary source linked above and consult current USCIS guidance before filing.