Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, LITIGATION NEWS, TRENDS—New lawsuit challenges $100K H-1B price tag proclaimed by White House, (Oct 6, 2025)

By Patricia K. Ruiz, J.D.

Under the proclamation, DHS and the Department of State must “deny entry to the United States to any H-1B nonimmigrant” whose employer has not made the $100,000 payment.

Global Nurse Force, a health care business helping hospitals across the country fill critical vacancies with qualified nurses from abroad, along with other plaintiffs, including schools, religious organizations, labor unions, and workers, brought a lawsuit against President Donald Trump, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and its subagencies U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Department of State, as well as the heads of these agencies, challenging the legality and implementation of a Trump proclamation conditioning entry of H-1B workers on the payment of a $100,000 fee. The plaintiffs seek declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing that the proclamation and subsequent actions exceed the president’s Constitutional authority and contravene the statutory H-1B process and program.

Proclamation. On September 19, 2025, President Trump issued a proclamation restricting entry into the U.S. of workers on H-1B visas, conditioning their entry on employers making a $100,000 payment to the federal government. The proclamation states, “Entry into the United States of [H-1B workers] is restricted, except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000.” The proclamation directs DHS to “restrict decisions on petitions not accompanied by a $100,000 payment,” and directs State to “approve only those visa petitions for which the filing employer has made the [$100,000] payment.” Under the proclamation, DHS and State must “deny entry to the United States to any H-1B nonimmigrant” whose employer has not made the $100,000 payment. The proclamation made the new requirements effective as of 12:01 a.m. ET on September 21, 2025.

The proclamation does not specify to which agency the payment should be made, how it should be paid, where it will be deposited, or how it will be used. While the USCIS, the Department of State, and CBP issued statements collectively stating that the agencies’ policies limit the $100,000 requirement to new petitions and carve out renewals, the new policies do not differentiate between petitions for workers who are outside the U.S. and those for workers already inside the U.S., seemingly expanding the proclamation’s “entry” ban to include individuals who have already entered the country.

Allegations. The complaint argues that the abrupt imposition of the $100,000 requirement is unlawful, arguing that the president has no authority to unilaterally alter the comprehensive statutory scheme created by Congress. Further, they argue, the president has no authority to unilaterally impose fees, taxes, or other mechanisms to generate revenue for the U.S. or to dictate how such funds are spent. Similarly, Executive Branch agencies cannot act contrary to or beyond the authority conferred by statute, nor can they act beyond or contrary to their own regulations. In immediately adopting the $100,000 requirement without notice and comment, the agencies failed to go through the required regulatory processes in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the complaint argues. Further, the $100,000 requirement is arbitrary and capricious, as the government failed to consider the resulting stifling of innovation; harm to hospitals, churches, schools and universities, and small businesses and non-profits; and harm to communities across the nation. Economic data and studies confirm that the $100,000 requirement will harm, not help, the U.S. economy, as well as U.S. workers and their families, the complaint states.

Relief requested. The complaint requests that the court declare unlawful and set aside: (1) certain portions of the proclamation; (2) enforcement and implementation of these sections; and (3) any agency guidance, procedures, or determinations made pursuant to the proclamation. Further, the complaint requests that the court enjoin the defendants from requiring the $100,000 payment and from conditioning H-1B petition adjudications, visa issuance, or entry on such payment and require that the defendants process H-1B petitions under existing law, without the $100,000 provision.

The case is No. 3:25-cv-08454.

News: LitigationNewsTrends ImmigrationNews Immigration AgencyNews