In a decision issued today, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston has struck down the $100,000 fee imposed on certain H-1B petitions for foreign nationals employed in specialty occupation positions. The $100,000 fee, which we reported on and analyzed in a number of Alerts in September and October of last year, was introduced through a presidential proclamation of September 19, 2025, and requires that “new” H-1B petitions filed at or after 12:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight time on September 21, 2025, be accompanied by an additional $100,000 fee. The applicability of the $100,000 fee was clarified in a number of subsequent agency comments and guidance documents. It is now substantially clear that it does not apply to H-1B petitions seeking an extension of stay (unless the extension is denied and the petition is approved for consular notification) or petitions seeking a change of status to H-1B (unless, again, the change of status is denied and the petition is approved for consular notification).
Judge Sorokin’s decision closes out the State of California v. Noem action filed in the District Court for Massachusetts on December 12, 2025, by twenty Democratic state attorneys general to challenge the $100,000 fee. The fee had previously been upheld in Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Department of Homeland Security, a separate court challenge filed in the federal District Court for Washington, D.C. (appeal pending). A third challenge, Global Nurse Force v. Trump, is currently pending in the Northern District of California.
The state plaintiffs in State of California v. Noem alleged that the $100,000 fee has a damaging effect on healthcare and educational institutions in their states, which rely on the H-1B specialty occupation category to hire workers for specialized positions. In challenging the actions of the administration to implement the fee, the plaintiffs argued that the Trump administration enacting an unauthorized revenue tax and violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by imposing the policy in an arbitrary and capricious manner and without the requisite notice-and-comment rulemaking. The plaintiffs further argued that the introduction of the $100,000 fee violates the constitutional separation of powers by encroaching on the legislative branch’s power to levy taxes, without any delegation of authority by Congress.
Judge Sorokin agreed with these arguments and issued a declaratory judgment that the $100,000 fee is unlawful. The judgment vacates in its entirety all guidance related to the presidential proclamation of September 19, 2025, including the H-1B FAQ documents published by United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Department of State, the USCIS memorandum and website related to the Proclamation, and the pay.gov website created for payment of the $100,000 fee. This means that neither USCIS nor any other federal agency may charge the $100,000 in connection with the adjudication of an H-1B petition or the admission to the United States of an H-1B beneficiary. Petitioners that have already paid the $100,000 fee may also be entitled to a refund of this fee, although no information is yet available on this issue.
An appeal will almost certainly be filed immediately by the U.S. government, particularly since there is a contradictory decision from another district court judge upholding the $100,000 fee. This may affect the validity and enforceability of this decision if the Court of Appeals grants a stay of this judgment. During a stay, the fee could continue to be imposed. Judge Sorokin also declined to issue a permanent injunction on the enforcement of the $100,000 fee, instead relying on the government to comply with his order vacating all actions implementing the fee. Given the clear split between various federal districts over the validity of the $100,000 fee, it is highly likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will take up this matter, and there is certainly no guarantee that it will agree with this decision.
