Federal Judge Strikes Down Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee, Citing Unlawful Tax Authority

A U.S. federal judge on Monday invalidated the Trump administration’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas, ruling it an unlawful tax imposed without congressional authorization. The decision by U.S. District Court Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston marks a significant legal setback for the Trump-era policy, which aimed to restrict foreign workers in high-skilled industries. The ruling, which aligns with a separate lawsuit by 20 Democratic state attorneys general, underscores tensions over executive authority in immigration policy.

Judge’s Ruling and Legal Basis

The court’s decision centered on the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs how federal agencies create regulations. Judge Sorokin concluded that the Trump administration exceeded its authority by imposing the fee, calling it a “tax on H-1B petitions without the requisite delegation by Congress.” The ruling specifically highlights the lack of legislative approval for such a substantial financial burden on employers and foreign workers.

The H-1B visa program, designed for high-skilled workers in specialized fields, typically costs employers $2,000 to $5,000 in fees. The Trump administration’s fee hike, introduced in September 2025, was criticized for stifling applications and exacerbating labor shortages. By February 2026, only 85 payments had been made under the new fee, according to court filings.

Impact on H-1B Visa Program

Legal challenges to the fee argued that it disproportionately affected industries reliant on foreign talent, including technology, education, and healthcare. The 20 states involved, including Massachusetts and California, contended that the policy hindered their ability to recruit educators, researchers, and medical professionals. The American Medical Association (AMA) criticized the fee as a barrier to addressing physician shortages, particularly in rural and underserved areas.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which also sued the administration, highlighted the economic repercussions of the policy. While a separate lawsuit in Washington, D.C., was denied summary judgment, the Boston ruling creates a split in legal interpretations, with potential implications for future appeals.

Reactions from Officials and Organizations

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell praised the ruling as a victory for “addressing severe labor shortages in vital industries.” She emphasized the importance of the H-1B program in filling critical roles at colleges and universities. The AMA’s Bobby Mukkamala echoed this sentiment, stating the decision would “remove obstacles to attract talented physicians and other highly skilled professionals.”

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) disputed the ruling, calling it “judicial activism” that undermined immigration reform efforts. A DHS statement defended the fee as part of broader measures to prioritize American workers, though it acknowledged the policy’s scheduled expiration in September 2026.

What’s Next for the H-1B Visa Policy?

The Trump administration has indicated plans to appeal the ruling, with White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers expressing confidence that the decision would be reversed. However, the immediate effect of the court’s summary judgment is to nullify the fee, at least temporarily. Legal analysts note that the ruling could influence ongoing debates over executive power and the balance between immigration control and labor market needs.

As the legal landscape evolves, the H-1B visa program remains a focal point for discussions on workforce development and international labor mobility. The outcome of future appeals and legislative actions will likely shape the program’s trajectory in the coming years.