Federal Judge Blocks Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Unconstitutional Tax
On June 8, 2026, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Massachusetts blocked President Trump's $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications, ruling it an illegal tax that exceeded executive authority. The fee, imposed by proclamation in September 2025, was challenged by 20 Democratic-led states, including California, which argued it harmed hiring in education and healthcare. The ruling vacated the fee, citing separation of powers and the Administrative Procedure Act. The Trump administration appealed on June 11, setting up a likely Supreme Court battle over presidential taxing power.
Cross-source coverage
Wire timeline
US Court Strikes Down Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Unlawful Tax
A U.S. federal judge struck down former President Donald Trump's policy imposing a $100,000 fee on H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers. The June 8, 2026 ruling, with nationwide effect, found the fee was an unlawful tax that exceeded presidential authority without Congressional delegation. The Trump administration had imposed the fee via Proclamation 10973, arguing the H-1B program was exploited to replace American workers. A coalition of 20 states, led by California, challenged the measure, contending it violated separation of powers and hindered their ability to recruit skilled workers in sectors like healthcare, education, and research. The judge classified the charge as a tax rather than a penalty because it was not tied to any misconduct. Indians, comprising roughly 70% of H-1B recipients, were primary targets of the fee.
The Hindu: Latest News today from India and the World, Breaking news, Top Headlines and Trending News Videos.US Judge Strikes Down Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Unlawful Tax
On June 8, 2026, U.S. District Judge Leo T. Sorokin struck down President Donald Trump's policy imposing a $100,000 fee on H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers. The ruling, with nationwide effect, upheld a challenge by California and 19 other states. The court found the fee constituted an unlawful tax that the President could not impose without Congressional delegation. Trump's Proclamation 10973, signed September 19, 2025, argued the H-1B program was being exploited to replace American workers. The fee represented a massive increase over pre-existing costs ranging from $960 to $7,595. Plaintiff states argued the fee would worsen teacher shortages, disrupt research, and deepen healthcare staffing gaps. India, whose nationals account for roughly 70% of H-1B approvals, faced significant implications from the policy.
The Hindu: Latest News today from India and the World, Breaking news, Top Headlines and Trending News Videos.Trump administration appeals ruling blocking $100,000 H-1B visa fee
The Trump administration has appealed a federal judge's ruling that struck down President Trump's $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications. The Justice Department filed the notice on June 11, three days after U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston vacated the fee, ruling that Trump exceeded his authority by imposing what amounted to a tax without congressional approval. The fee, imposed by presidential proclamation in September 2025, represented a dramatic increase from the previous range of $2,000 to $5,000 per application. The H-1B program, created in 1990, is heavily used by U.S. tech companies to hire highly skilled foreign workers. Several companies, including Walmart, had paused their participation in the program due to the fee. The ruling was a blow to Trump's efforts to restrict the program, which he argued was being abused and replacing American workers.
US Top News and AnalysisFederal Judge Rules Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee Unconstitutional
A federal judge in Boston, Leo Sorokin, ruled on June 9, 2026, that President Donald Trump's $100,000 fee for H-1B visa applications is unconstitutional, violating the separation of powers by imposing a tax without congressional delegation. The decision vacates the fee, which Trump announced in September 2025 via a proclamation citing abuse of the program. Sorokin also found the policy violated the Administrative Procedure Act as arbitrary and capricious. This ruling conflicts with a December 2025 decision by D.C. Judge Beryl Howell, who upheld the fee under broad presidential authority granted by the Immigration and Nationality Act. The case stems from a lawsuit by California and 19 other states, while Howell's ruling addressed a challenge by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The disagreement centers on statutory interpretation and whether the fee usurps Congress's tax power under Article I.
Reason.comThe $100,000 H-1B Trump Fee Case Is Really A Tax Case
A federal judge in Massachusetts blocked the Trump administration's $100,000 fee increase for H-1B visas, siding with 20 states that challenged the policy. The fee, which jumped from a range of $960-$7,595 to $100,000, was framed as an immigration restriction. Judge Leo T. Sorokin ruled the payment is a tax, not a penalty, citing the Supreme Court's 2012 NFIB v. Sebelius decision. This distinction harms the administration because the President lacks independent taxing power under the Constitution, unlike Congress. The case highlights a growing trend of courts using tax law to define boundaries between executive and legislative authority. An appeal to the Supreme Court is likely, with the central question being whether the President can use broad immigration authority to impose what is effectively a tax.
Forbes - BusinessFederal Court Invalidates Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Illegal Usurpation of Congress' Power to Tax
The US District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in California v. Mullin that the Trump administration's $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications is illegal because it usurps Congress's power to tax. Judge Leo Sorokin determined the fee is a tax, not a penalty or regulatory payment, and that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sections 212(f) and 215(a) do not delegate taxing power to the President. The ruling relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, which held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize tariffs. The court found that terms like 'restrictions' and 'regulations' in the INA do not encompass the power to tax, making the fee an unconstitutional executive overreach.
Reason.comFederal Court Invalidates Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Illegal Tax
The US District Court for the District of Massachusetts ruled in California v. Mullin that the Trump administration's $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications is illegal because it usurps Congress's power to tax. Judge H. Lee Sarokin determined the fee is a tax, not a penalty or regulatory payment, and that the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) does not delegate taxing authority to the President. The ruling relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, which held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize tariffs. The court found that INA provisions allowing the President to impose restrictions and regulations on noncitizen entry do not encompass the power to tax.
Reason.comFederal judge strikes down Trump's $100,000 H-1B visa fee
A federal judge in Boston, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, struck down the $100,000 fee that President Donald Trump imposed on new H-1B visas, ruling the charge unlawful. The decision came in a lawsuit filed by 20 Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the fee announced in September. The H-1B visa is the primary U.S. work visa for highly skilled foreign professionals, especially in tech fields, and is capped at 85,000 new grants annually. Standard filing fees had historically ranged from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars. The ruling removes a major cost barrier for the tech and crypto sectors, which rely heavily on H-1B hires for engineering and research roles. The Trump administration may appeal the decision, but for now the $100,000 fee is invalidated. The dispute also attracted attention on prediction markets, with a Polymarket contract on the outcome generating roughly $99,000 in trading volume.
Yahoo FinanceJudge Blocks $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee Imposed by Trump Administration
A federal judge, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, blocked a $100,000 fee for H-1B visa applications that was imposed by the Trump administration. The ruling sided with a group of Democratic-led states, which argued that the administration exceeded its authority by imposing the fee. Judge Sorokin determined that the $100,000 payment functioned as a tax, thereby usurping Congress's constitutional power to set immigration policy and levy taxes. The decision halts the enforcement of the fee, which had been challenged as an overreach of executive power. The case highlights ongoing legal battles over immigration policy and the limits of executive authority in setting visa-related costs.
Just In NewsFederal Judge Overturns Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee as Illegal Tax
A federal judge in Massachusetts, Leo Sorokin, blocked President Donald Trump's $100,000 fee on H-1B visa petitions, ruling it an illegal tax that the president cannot impose without congressional approval. The ruling, citing the Supreme Court's 2012 decision in National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, determined the fee was not a penalty for unlawful acts but a revenue-raising measure. The Trump administration had argued the fee aimed to reduce H-1B applications, but Sorokin noted that purpose and effect differ, and the fee clearly raises revenue. The judge ordered the directive vacated entirely. The article also notes that H-1B visa holders contributed significantly to U.S. productivity growth between 1990 and 2020, and criticizes the administration's immigration policies as economically harmful.
The New RepublicJudge Halts Trump's $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee
A federal judge in Massachusetts, Leo T. Sorokin, blocked President Donald Trump's executive order imposing a $100,000 fee on companies seeking H-1B visas for foreign workers. The ruling, issued on June 8, 2026, found that the fee effectively constituted a tax, and that Congress had not delegated taxing power to the president under immigration law. The judge rejected the administration's argument that the fee was a 'regulatory payment.' California and other states had sued in December 2025, arguing the fee harmed their ability to hire teachers and healthcare professionals. The H-1B program provides 85,000 visas annually for high-skilled workers. The ruling is part of ongoing legal challenges to Trump's immigration restrictions.
Roll Call