FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SAN FRANCISCO — A second federal court granted preliminary relief blocking enforcement of the Trump-Vance administration’s unlawful $100,000 H-1B visa fee — a de facto innovation ban — delivering relief to employers, workers, and communities across the country.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s ruling blocks enforcement of the $100,000 H-1B fee until federal immigration agencies comply with the Administrative Procedure Act.  The ruling finds that plaintiffs demonstrated the fee is likely unlawful and would cause irreparable harm. The decision helps remove a major obstacle to the H-1B program, which Congress established to allow U.S. employers to hire highly skilled foreign professionals, including doctors, nurses, teachers, engineers, researchers, and clergy — many of whom would fill critical labor shortages.

The $100,000 fee was initially imposed through a September 19, 2025 presidential proclamation and took effect just 36 hours later, bypassing Congress and ignoring long-standing immigration law. In a related case, in January 2026, twenty states challenged those fees, and in June, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled the fees were unlawful.

The fee was recently renewed through a September 18, 2026 presidential proclamation. The Northern District of California ruling blocks implementation of both proclamations. 

Plaintiffs in this case include medical practices serving rural communities, a Tribal K-12 school, manufacturing companies, educational institutions, labor organizations, and individual workers whose careers and ability to serve their communities were halted overnight.

The coalition filed suit in this case on October 3, 2025, and shortly after, the administration quietly issued new guidance walking back one of the policy’s most extreme provisions—signaling that the fee may not apply to certain individuals already in the U.S. who are in the process of changing their immigration status. However, the unlawful $100,000 fee remained in effect in many circumstances, harming students, workers, and employers in the United States.

The plaintiffs who sought a preliminary injunction are: BAE Industries, Nephrology Associates of the Carolinas, Lower Brule Day School, Global Village Academy Collaborative, and Global Nurse Force. They are represented by Democracy Forward, Justice Action Center, South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO), Kuck Baxter LLC, Joseph & Hall, P.C., IMMpact Litigation, and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll LLP.

The coalition issued the following joint statement:

“This decision protects patients, students, workers, and communities across the country from an unlawful and arbitrary fee that Congress never authorized. This administration’s Innovation Ban threatened to shut out doctors from rural hospitals, teachers from classrooms, engineers from job sites, and clergy from congregations. The court’s ruling reaffirms a basic principle: agencies cannot demand payment of arbitrary fees just because the president says so.”

Plaintiffs’ and co-counsel quotes on this matter can be found here.

Plaintiffs argued that the fee violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the Immigration and Nationality Act and exceeds presidential authority by overriding Congress’s control over immigration fees.

The case is Global Nurse Force et al. v. Trump et al., pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read the opinion here.

Plaintiff Quotes

“As lead plaintiff in this challenge, Global Nurse Force stood up because this $100,000 fee was already forcing hospitals to pause recruitment of urgently needed healthcare professionals and putting patient care at risk,” said Lalit Pattanaik, CEO of Global Nurse Force. “This ruling is a victory for America’s health systems, international nurses and doctors, and the communities that depend on them. We will continue fighting for fair, workable immigration pathways that strengthen our nation’s healthcare workforce.”

“This decision is a welcome step for rural health care,” said Michaelle Waters, Practice Administrator, Nephrology Associates of the Carolinas. “The challenged H-1B payment requirement has created a significant financial barrier for rural practices seeking to recruit physicians, further limiting their ability to address existing provider shortages and meet community health care needs. This decision is helping preserve rural practices’ ability to recruit and retain physicians they might otherwise be unable to afford, including specialists like nephrologists. For communities already facing provider shortages and long travel distances for care, access to these physicians is essential to ensuring timely specialty services, continuity of care, and fewer delays in treatment.”

“This ruling is significant for Lower Brule Day School because it removes a $100,000 financial barrier that would have severely limited our ability to recruit qualified teachers, allowing us to continue using the H-1B program to bring dedicated educators to our students and community,” said Lance L. Witte, Superintendent, Lower Brule Schools.

Co-counsel Quotes

“Communities across this country depend on skilled professionals who care for patients, teach students, build infrastructure, conduct research, and serve congregations,” said Steve Bressler, Senior Legal Advisor at Democracy Forward. “The administration tried to financially punish companies with an arbitrary, unauthorized, and deeply harmful $100,000 fee imposed without Congress. This decision adds to those protecting workers and communities, and protects a system that was thrown into chaos overnight. It also reaffirms a fundamental principle of our democracy: no administration is above the law, and the president cannot rewrite immigration policy with the stroke of a pen.”

“All of us benefit from a functional and accessible H-1B program, but especially patients at rural hospitals, students at schools that rely on international educators, and companies working to keep this country competitive in the global market,” said Karen Tumlin, Founder and Director at Justice Action Center. “This decision is a victory for our plaintiffs and employers like them, their prospective employees, and the communities they are eager to serve. We remain committed to using every legal tool available to protect this program for the long-haul.”

“Indian nationals bore a disproportionate share of the harm from this $100,000 fee, which put employment opportunities and families’ futures at risk and left employers unable to afford the workers they needed,” said Kalpana V. Peddibhotla, Executive Director of the South Asian American Justice Collaborative. “For SAAJCO, challenging this policy is a matter of protecting our community from government action that upends lives without regard for the consequences. This ruling provides meaningful relief and requires federal agencies to answer to the law.”

“Judge Gilliam’s order is a significant victory for the rule of law. The government tried to impose a $100,000 fee on H-1B petitions through memos and FAQs, without public input and without considering the harm to small businesses, rural hospitals, and schools. The court held that the agencies cannot do that, and it made clear that the order reaches the September 2026 extension as well. Two federal courts have now vacated these policies. Employers should know that, as of today, no agency policy lawfully requires the payment,” said Jesse M. Bless, on behalf of IMMpact Litigation 

#