Second Federal Judge Blocks $100K H-1B Fee—Fresh Uncertainty for FY 2027
On October 1, 2026, a California federal judge issued a second injunction halting Trump's $100K H-1B entry fee, finding the administration violated administrative procedure. Employers filing FY 2027 petitions now face renewed legal limbo.
The Ruling: California Judge Blocks Fee Again
U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam in Oakland, California, found that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the State Department failed to follow required rule-making processes before implementing the fee. The US District Court for the Northern District of California on Wednesday blocked President Donald Trump's $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, marking the second time a federal court has enjoined enforcement of the policy.
The ruling, issued September 30 and published October 1, 2026, came in the case Global Nurse Force v. Trump, a case that was originally filed in October 2025. Judge Haywood Gilliam granted the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction in part, preventing US agencies from implementing Sections 1, 2, and 3(a) of a renewed presidential proclamation requiring employers filing an H-1B petition on behalf of noncitizens outside the US to pay $100,000.
What Triggered the Fee in the First Place
President Trump initially imposed the $100,000 fee in a September 2025 proclamation. Trump had initially imposed the $100,000 charge for certain new H-1B workers coming to the U.S. from abroad. The policy was set to expire on September 21, but the administration extended it for another year, through September 21, 2027.
The fee applies to H-1B consular petitions—cases where the visa applicant applies for processing at a U.S. consulate abroad, rather than adjusting status within the U.S.
The Administrative Procedure Act Issue
The court found the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim that the agencies failed to comply with procedural requirements. The court therefore granted the injunction until the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) completes proper notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act and conducts analyses on the proposed rule's impact on small businesses under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The core legal finding: the Trump administration imposed the fee through executive proclamation without the formal rulemaking process—public notice, comment period, and regulatory impact analysis—that administrative law requires for such substantive policy changes.
This Is the Second Court Win Against the Fee
U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston ruled June 8 that Congress never authorized President Donald Trump to impose the fee, declaring it unlawful and vacating it in its entirety. The decision comes after a separate federal judge in Boston blocked the fee in June in a lawsuit brought by 20 states. The Boston-based appeals court declined in July to pause that ruling, leaving the fee blocked in that case as the legal fight continues.
That June decision came via a lawsuit filed by California and 19 other state attorneys general. Judge Sorokin took the position that the fee amounts to a tax, for which only Congress has the authority to levy.
Current Status: Fee Not Being Collected
The fee is currently not being collected because of the court orders blocking its implementation. For now, employers can file H-1B petitions under the standard fee schedule while the appeal proceeds. This means the standard H-1B filing fees—currently $460 for the I-129 petition plus required supplements—remain in effect.
What This Means for Your FY 2027 Filing
If you're an employer sponsoring an H-1B worker for fiscal year 2027 (which runs October 1, 2026–September 30, 2027), the $100K charge is not required at this time. File under the current fee structure. However, the legal landscape remains unsettled.
The Trump administration continues to push forward with a separate formal rulemaking to establish a permanent $103,265 fee through the standard notice-and-comment process. The decision adds another setback for the administration even as it pushes forward with a separate plan to make a similar fee permanent through formal regulation. If that rulemaking succeeds and survives court challenge, the fee could be reimposed—legally.
The legal landscape remains complicated because a third federal judge previously sided with the administration. In December 2025, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell in Washington rejected a separate challenge brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities. Howell concluded that federal immigration statutes gave the president sufficiently broad authority to impose the entry restriction. That case is on appeal.
The Coalition Behind This Win
The suit was brought by healthcare, educational, and religious organizations, along with groups representing those sectors and immigrant-rights interests. They highlighted the role of H-1B visa holders in US productivity growth, addressing shortages of healthcare professionals needed to serve an aging population, filling shortages of teachers and foreign-language instructors, and providing pastoral and missionary services.
The litigation path is complex and far from settled. Stay alert to further developments as the government appeals and continues formal rulemaking.