U.S. Judge Blocks Trump’s Proposed $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee, Calling It An Unlawful Tax

U.S. Judge Blocks Trump’s Proposed $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee, Calling It an Unlawful Tax A federal judge has struck down President Donald Trump’s controversial $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa applications, ruling that the administration exceeded its authority by imposing what amounted to a tax without congressional approval. The decision was issued by U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston following a lawsuit brought by a coalition of 20 Democratic state attorneys general. The states argued that the fee would make it significantly more difficult for employers, universities, hospitals and research institutions to recruit highly skilled foreign workers. Trump announced the fee in September 2025 as part of a broader effort to reform the H-1B visa system and prioritize American workers. The measure increased the cost of obtaining an H-1B visa by as much as 20 to 50 times previous levels, making it one of the most dramatic changes ever proposed for the program. In his ruling, Judge Sorokin concluded that the charge functioned as a tax rather than a regulatory fee. Under the U.S. Constitution, only Congress has the authority to impose taxes, meaning the president lacked the legal power to enact the measure through executive action alone. The court also found that the administration’s interpretation of federal immigration law was too broad. Government lawyers had argued that existing immigration statutes gave the president authority to restrict entry by foreign nationals deemed detrimental to U.S. interests, including through financial penalties. The judge rejected that argument, ruling that such authority did not extend to imposing a major new tax on visa applications. The H-1B program is widely used by American employers to hire highly skilled foreign professionals in fields such as technology, engineering, healthcare, finance and scientific research. Major technology companies, including firms in Silicon Valley, depend heavily on the program to recruit specialized talent. Opponents of the fee argued that it would worsen labor shortages in sectors already struggling to find qualified workers. States participating in the lawsuit said the policy threatened their ability to recruit doctors, nurses, teachers, researchers and university faculty members.Business groups and higher-education organizations also welcomed the ruling, saying the fee would have created significant barriers for employers seeking international talent. Critics contended that the surcharge would have discouraged innovation and harmed U.S. competitiveness in industries that rely on highly skilled workers. The Trump administration defended the measure as a way to protect American jobs and reduce reliance on foreign labor. White House officials have indicated they expect the decision to be appealed, setting up another legal battle over the scope of presidential authority in immigration policy. The ruling represents a significant setback for one of the administration’s signature immigration initiatives and reinforces judicial limits on executive power to impose fees and taxes without explicit authorization from Congress.