The controversial $100,000 H-1B visa fee has been blocked once again.
On Friday, July 24, 2026, a three-judge panel for the First Circuit officially denied the government's emergency motion
to reinstate the fee while the appeal proceeds, delivering a significant — if procedural — victory for the coalition of states and employers who have challenged the policy since its inception.
As a result, the district court's ruling remains in effect, and the $100,000 H-1B fee cannot currently be enforced while the case continues through the courts.
But with less than a month until the underlying Presidential Proclamation expires, multiple lawsuits producing conflicting outcomes, and the possibility of Supreme Court intervention still on the table, the road ahead for H-1B stakeholders remains anything but certain.
How We Got Here
On September 19, 2025, President Trump signed Proclamation 10973 titled "Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers," which seeks to restrict the entry to the United States of H-1B specialty occupation workers unless employers pay an extra $100,000 fee under certain conditions.
The proclamation required U.S. employers filing H-1B petitions for certain foreign workers on or after September 21, 2025, to submit an additional $100,000 payment as a condition of eligibility. USCIS later clarified that the additional fee would apply primarily if the H-1B beneficiary were outside the United States at the time of filing, or if an H-1B petition were filed with a request for consular processing or port-of-entry notification.
Twenty states, led by California and Massachusetts, challenged the policy in federal court, arguing that the Administration exceeded its statutory authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
The states also alleged that the policy would significantly impair their ability to recruit and retain highly skilled workers for public universities, educational institutions, and healthcare systems.
On June 8, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in favor of the states, finding the policy unlawful and vacating it in its entirety.
The court's reasoning was forceful:
the government failed to make the strong showing of likely success on the merits needed for a stay, with the court agreeing with the states that the $100,000 payment functions like a fee or tax requiring a clear congressional delegation under Skinner v. Mid-America Pipeline Co.
The Procedural Ping-Pong
What followed the June 8 ruling was a dizzying sequence of procedural maneuvers.
Judge Leo T. Sorokin denied the government's request for a full stay pending appeal but granted an alternative request for an administrative stay — temporarily pausing the ruling while the government filed its emergency motion with the First Circuit, conditioned on the government filing by June 18, 2026.
On June 18, 2026, the government timely filed an emergency request asking the First Circuit Court of Appeals to pause the lower court's ruling while the appeal moves forward.
The government argued that halting fee collection immediately would cause irreparable harm to agency operations.
The First Circuit was unconvinced.
The First Circuit agreed with the lower court and noted that the plaintiff states were likely to be substantially injured by the stay. The court's order means that the $100,000 H-1B application fee remains vacated pending a decision on the merits in the underlying appeal.
USCIS Response
In a notable development,
USCIS acknowledged that the First Circuit denied the government's motion, stating that "DHS strongly disagrees with the First Circuit's order denying the stay request but will comply with the court's order while DHS considers next steps."
However,
USCIS has not yet issued revised guidance or H-1B filing instructions reflecting the First Circuit's decision, and the agency's published instructions and filing systems may not be updated immediately.
Conflicting Rulings Create a Path to the Supreme Court
Adding complexity, the First Circuit's ruling stands in direct tension with a decision from another federal court.
On December 24, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia upheld the legality of the $100,000 H-1B visa fee requirement. The lower court concluded that the Trump Administration's imposition of the fee falls within the broad authority Congress delegated to the executive branch and the president to restrict the entry of noncitizens into the United States.
The government could seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court by requesting an emergency stay of the decision, reviving the $100,000 fee. Two other federal lawsuits over the fee remain pending, and in one instance, the district court has determined that the fee did fall within the president's existing authority over non-citizen entry. This suit is now pending appeal at U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Federal courts have reached conflicting conclusions on the fee, leaving open the possibility of further review, potentially up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The Ticking Clock: September 20, 2026
Beyond the appellate litigation, a practical deadline looms large.
By its terms, Proclamation 10973 imposes a temporary 12-month restriction that will expire on September 20, 2026, unless extended.
With approximately six weeks remaining, the practical question for many employers is becoming more immediate: what exposure exists during the remaining period, and will the Administration extend, renew, or reissue the Proclamation, regardless of when the First Circuit ultimately rules?
Within 30 days of the first H-1B lottery conducted after the proclamation's effective date, four officials (the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Labor, and the Secretary of Homeland Security) must submit recommendations to the President on whether to renew, modify, or let the fee expire.
What This Means for Employers and H-1B Applicants
For employers filing H-1B petitions right now, the immediate takeaway is clear:
employers are not currently required to submit a $100,000 payment in connection with H-1B petitions, and USCIS and the Department of State cannot enforce the vacated policy while the appeal remains pending.
Since the fee is currently unenforceable, employers holding petitions solely due to the $100,000 cost can confidently proceed with standard filing fees ($2,000–$5,000), knowing they are acting within the current legal landscape.
Maintaining records of any paid fees is essential, as the court's view of the fee as an unlawful tax could support future refund claims for employers.
The FY2027 cap filing deadline passed on June 30, 2026, and USCIS announced the cap was reached with no second lottery. What remains live is cap-exempt filings, petitions requesting consular notification, sponsored employees who are currently outside the United States, and international travel decisions.
However,
this is an interim victory, not necessarily the final conclusion of the litigation.
The fee could return if a higher court grants a stay, if the government ultimately wins the appeal, or if Congress passes legislation authorizing such a payment. Therefore, employers should not assume the issue is permanently resolved.
What Employers Should Do Now
Given the fluid nature of this litigation, immigration attorneys recommend the following steps:
1. File without the $100,000 fee — but verify USCIS filing instructions before submission, as
USCIS guidance may lag after court rulings, making it crucial to confirm current fee requirements with legal counsel before filing to avoid errors.
2. Preserve all payment records —
given the conflicting rulings so far, employers may want to retain documentation of any fees previously paid in the event a future ruling reinstates the requirement or establishes a path to refunds.
3. Monitor the September 20 expiration —
because the fee has been vacated and the Proclamation lapses in about six weeks on its current terms, for petitions that can be filed and adjudicated inside that window, exposure is limited even if the government later obtains a stay. For anything with a longer runway, the risk is real and should be priced in.
4. Watch for Supreme Court action —
The First Circuit will continue to review the district court decision on its substantive legal merits. The government could seek review from the U.S. Supreme Court by requesting an emergency stay of the decision, reviving the $100,000 fee.
Looking Ahead
The $100,000 H-1B fee has been in force, vacated, reinstated, and vacated again since September 2025, and the Proclamation's expiration date adds a second variable to an already unsettled picture.
The convergence of the First Circuit's appeal, the D.C. Circuit's parallel proceedings, the looming September 20 expiration, and the possibility of executive extension means the landscape could shift again at any moment.
For H-1B employers, workers, and their attorneys, vigilance remains essential. ClinchLaw will continue to monitor all developments in this case and provide timely updates as the situation evolves.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult with a qualified immigration attorney regarding your specific circumstances.