The $100,000 fee the Trump administration tried to attach to many H-1B petitions remains blocked, but the H-1B visa fee court fight is nowhere near settled. On 24 July 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the federal government’s motion to pause a lower court ruling that had vacated the fee, according to reporting from SHRM. That leaves the fee unenforceable while the broader legal battle continues.
How the H-1B visa fee court fight got here
President Trump issued a proclamation on 19 September 2025 requiring an extra $100,000 payment for H-1B petitions processed through consular notification, a filing route commonly used by employers sponsoring workers applying from outside the United States. A Massachusetts district court, in a lawsuit brought by attorneys general from 20 states, ruled on 8 June 2026 that the fee effectively functioned as a tax and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the federal law governing how agencies issue binding rules. US District Judge Leo Sorokin, who issued that ruling, found the fee exceeded the president’s authority, according to Staffing Industry’s reporting on the case. The district court then stayed its own ruling, which, somewhat counterintuitively, let USCIS keep collecting the fee while the government pursued its appeal.
What the appeals court actually ruled
That is where the First Circuit’s July decision changes the picture. The appeals court found the government unlikely to succeed in overturning the district court’s underlying ruling, and on that basis refused to let the fee collection continue during the appeal. Crucially, the court did not decide whether the $100,000 fee policy is ultimately lawful, only that the government hadn’t shown enough likelihood of winning to justify keeping it in force while the case plays out. That is a narrower, more procedural ruling than a final verdict on the fee’s legality, even though its practical effect right now is the same: employers don’t have to pay it.
What employers should actually do
For companies filing new H-1B petitions, including cap petitions, the immediate guidance is straightforward: the fee cannot currently be enforced, so petitions can move forward without it, though consulting immigration counsel before filing remains sensible given how quickly this status could change. For employers who already paid the fee before the ruling, the picture is murkier. They should hold on to proof of payment and wait for formal agency guidance, since it isn’t yet clear whether, or how, that money could be recovered. USCIS is expected to issue its own instructions on resuming H-1B filings in light of the ruling.
Why this almost certainly isn’t the end of it
One attorney quoted in the SHRM reporting expects the government to seek an emergency stay directly from the Supreme Court, which could act on such a request at any time regardless of the normal appeals calendar. If the Supreme Court grants a stay, the fee could come back into force while the underlying legal questions are still being litigated. The fee could also return outright if the government eventually wins its appeal, or if Congress passes legislation authorizing a similar charge through ordinary lawmaking rather than executive proclamation.
The broader legal landscape adds more uncertainty. Several related cases are still working their way through the courts, including State of California v. Markwayne Mullin, Chamber of Commerce v. DHS now on appeal at the DC Circuit, and Global Nurse Force v. Trump in the Northern District of California. Any one of those could shape how, or whether, a version of this fee eventually survives in some form.
What to watch in the weeks ahead
Watch for two things in the coming weeks: whether the government actually files for an emergency Supreme Court stay, and whether USCIS issues the formal filing guidance it’s expected to produce. Until either happens, H-1B sponsors can treat the $100,000 fee as paused rather than cancelled, and should plan filings with the possibility that the rules could shift again on short notice.
Frequently asked questions
Is the $100,000 H-1B fee currently in effect?
No. The fee cannot currently be enforced. The First Circuit Court of Appeals denied the federal government’s request to pause a lower court ruling that vacated the fee, so USCIS cannot collect it while the government’s appeal continues.
What did the First Circuit actually decide?
On 24 July 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the government’s motion to stay a 8 June 2026 district court order. It found the government unlikely to succeed on appeal, but it did not rule on whether the fee policy itself is ultimately lawful.
Where did the $100,000 H-1B fee come from?
President Trump issued a proclamation on 19 September 2025 requiring an extra $100,000 payment for H-1B petitions processed through consular notification. A Massachusetts district court later ruled on 8 June 2026 that the fee functioned as a tax and violated the Administrative Procedure Act.
Could the H-1B visa fee ruling still be overturned?
Yes. One attorney quoted in reporting on the case expects the government to seek an emergency stay from the Supreme Court, which could act at any time. The fee could also return if the government wins its appeal outright, or if Congress separately authorizes it.
What should employers do if they already paid the fee?
Keep proof of payment and wait for formal USCIS guidance, since it remains unclear how the ruling affects an employer’s ability to recover money already paid. Employers currently filing new H-1B petitions can do so without the fee for now, though consulting immigration counsel first is advisable.
Are other lawsuits challenging similar fees?
Yes. Separate related cases, including State of California v. Markwayne Mullin, Chamber of Commerce v. DHS at the DC Circuit, and Global Nurse Force v. Trump in Northern California, remain pending and could affect how this fight ultimately resolves.
For more on how US work-visa policy has been shifting, see our coverage of the DHS proposal to end deference on work visa extensions and the PERM suspension affecting major employers.
