A US federal judge has upheld former President Donald Trump’s controversial decision to impose a $100,000 application fee on new H-1B visas, delivering a major setback to technology companies and business groups that rely heavily on skilled foreign workers.
In a ruling issued on Tuesday, Judge Beryl Howell of the US District Court for the District of Columbia held that Trump acted lawfully and within his statutory authority when he dramatically raised the cost of the popular employment-based visa programme.
The decision clears the way for the fee hike to take effect, reinforcing the administration’s broader immigration crackdown aimed at reducing foreign labour intake and prioritising domestic workers in high-skilled sectors such as technology, engineering, healthcare and education.
Court Rejects Business Challenge
The legal challenge was brought by the US Chamber of Commerce, which argued that the President lacked authority to impose such an unusually high fee without explicit congressional approval.
Rejecting the argument, Judge Howell ruled that Trump relied on an “express statutory grant of authority” that allows the President to regulate the entry of foreign nationals when national or economic security concerns are cited.
“Here, Congress has granted the President broad statutory authority, which he has used to issue the proclamation addressing, in the manner he sees fit, a problem he perceives to be a matter of economic and national security,” Howell wrote.
The ruling significantly strengthens the executive branch’s ability to shape immigration policy through presidential proclamations.
Fee Called ‘Cost-Prohibitive’ by Businesses
Business groups warned that a $100,000 H-1B application fee would effectively make the programme inaccessible for many employers, particularly:
- Start-ups and mid-sized firms
- Universities and research institutions
- Hospitals and healthcare providers
Daryl Joseffer, Executive Vice President of the US Chamber of Commerce, said the organisation was disappointed and is considering an appeal.
“We are evaluating next steps to ensure the H-1B programme operates as Congress intended—to allow American businesses access to global talent,” he said.
Why the H-1B Visa Matters
The H-1B visa programme is a central pillar of the US employment-based immigration system, allowing companies to hire foreign professionals in specialised occupations.
Demand far exceeds the annual cap, with visas allocated through a lottery. Major technology firms are among the biggest users, including:
- Amazon
- Microsoft
- Apple
- Meta Platforms
- Tata Consultancy Services
Supporters of the fee increase argue it discourages abuse of the programme and reduces over-reliance on foreign labour. Critics counter that it will drive talent away from the US to competing economies.
Multiple Legal Challenges Still Pending
The Chamber’s lawsuit is not the only challenge. A coalition of 19 US state attorneys general has filed a separate case, arguing that the fee hike would severely harm public-sector employers, particularly hospitals and universities.
A global nurse-staffing agency has also sued, warning that the policy could worsen healthcare staffing shortages.
The case decided by Judge Howell is formally titled Chamber of Commerce v. US Department of Homeland Security.
Political Context and Broader Impact
Trump announced the fee hike in September via presidential proclamation, framing it as a measure to protect American workers and curb misuse of the H-1B system by large corporations.
The ruling aligns closely with his administration’s long-standing immigration agenda focused on tighter controls, higher entry barriers and increased scrutiny of employment-based visas.
Unless overturned on appeal, the decision could fundamentally reshape how US companies hire global talent, with significant implications for:
- Indian IT firms
- Technology professionals
- Healthcare staffing
- Global workforce mobility
For Indian professionals—who form a substantial share of H-1B applicants—the ruling could alter overseas career prospects, hiring strategies and long-term migration planning.
