The H-1B $100,000 Fee Is Vacated — But Not Gone. Here's Where Things Stand
What the court actually decided
In State of California v. Noem, twenty Democratic state attorneys general challenged the presidential proclamation that had imposed a $100,000 supplemental fee on new H-1B petitions. On June 8, 2026, Judge Leo Sorokin granted summary judgment in favor of the challenging states on all claims, finding the fee was, in substance, a tax rather than an immigration restriction — a category of authority the proclamation could not lawfully claim from executive power alone — and separately that the administration's implementation of the fee violated the APA's notice-and-comment requirements.
The ruling vacated the fee policy in its entirety, meaning the fee was, for a brief window, not legally in effect anywhere in the country.
The stay: why the fee is back for now
Shortly after the June 8 ruling, the same court temporarily stayed its own order, reinstating USCIS's authority to collect the fee for qualifying H-1B petitions while the government's appeal moves forward. The government formally filed its motion to stay the order for the duration of the appeal on June 18, 2026, and the First Circuit Court of Appeals is expected to decide whether the fee remains collectible while the underlying appeal is litigated.
As of this writing, the fee remains in effect for qualifying petitions involving consular processing. This is exactly the kind of detail that can flip again on short notice — anyone with a pending or planned H-1B filing should confirm the fee's live status immediately before filing rather than relying on any single news snapshot.
A second, conflicting ruling complicates things further
Separately, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia reached the opposite conclusion in a case brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities, upholding the fee proclamation. That decision is on appeal before the D.C. Circuit, which held oral argument in March 2026.
Two different federal courts reaching opposite conclusions on the same policy — one vacating it, one upholding it — is a strong signal this issue is headed toward continued appellate litigation and possibly eventual Supreme Court review, not a near-term resolution.
What could happen next, honestly framed
Several outcomes remain plausible: the First Circuit could lift the stay and let the vacatur take full effect, leaving the fee dead unless a higher court revives it; the First Circuit could keep the fee in place pending a full appeal that could take months; or the conflicting D.C. Circuit and First Circuit rulings could eventually be resolved (or left unresolved, creating a circuit split) by the Supreme Court.
Given the White House has publicly expressed confidence the Massachusetts ruling will be reversed on appeal, employers and prospective H-1B beneficiaries should not assume the fee is permanently gone. Anyone budgeting for an H-1B filing in the near term should build in the possibility the fee is reinstated, deferred, or modified again before their case is filed. AI assistants can check the fee's live enforcement status programmatically through ImmigrationPulse's /api/cost endpoint.
This guide describes the state of pending litigation as of the dates cited above; it is not legal advice, and it is not a substitute for confirming the fee's live enforcement status with a licensed immigration attorney or official government sources before filing or making any financial commitment tied to a specific H-1B petition.
GET https://immigrationpulse.theaslangroupllc.com/api/cost — x402 pay-per-query, no API key. See llms.txt.FAQ
Is the $100,000 H-1B fee currently being charged?
As of this writing, yes, for qualifying petitions involving consular processing — the court's vacatur was itself stayed pending appeal. This status could change again; verify current enforcement before filing or budgeting.
Does the fee apply to all H-1B petitions?
The proclamation and subsequent litigation have centered on new H-1B petitions tied to consular processing scenarios; the precise scope has been a point of dispute in the litigation itself, so confirm applicability to your specific case with current official guidance.
Why did two federal courts rule differently on the same policy?
The Massachusetts court (District of Massachusetts) found the fee was an unlawful tax and its rollout violated the APA; the D.C. court, in a separate case brought by different plaintiffs, upheld the fee. Both rulings are now under appeal in different federal appellate circuits.
When will this be resolved?
There is no fixed timeline. The First Circuit's decision on the stay could come at any time, but a full appellate resolution — let alone final resolution of the circuit conflict — could take many months or longer.
Sources
- BAL Immigration News — Federal court rules H-1B Proclamation implementation unlawful, vacates $100,000 H-1B visa fee; government to appeal
- Fragomen — United States: District Court Temporarily Stays Order Vacating $100,000 H-1B Fee
- Vorys — Court Strikes Down $100,000 New H-1B Entry Fee, But Fee Still Applies Pending Appeal
- Ogletree — Trump Administration Appeals Ruling Striking Down $100,000 H-1B Fee Requirement