Just days after a federal judge struck down the Trump administration’s controversial $100,000 H-1B visa fee, the same court has temporarily put the policy back in place.
The decision, issued on June 12 by a federal court in Massachusetts, allows the government to continue collecting the fee while a higher court reviews the administration’s appeal. The temporary reversal has created fresh uncertainty for employers and foreign workers who were hoping the fee had been permanently blocked.
US judge pauses ruling against Trump’s $100,000 H-1B fee – What happened?
The legal battle centres on a policy introduced by Trump in 2025 that requires a $100,000 payment before certain new H-1B visa petitions can be processed.
On June 8, US District Judge Leo Sorokin ruled that the fee was unlawful and ordered it to be vacated. The judge found that the payment requirement amounted to a tax that had not been approved by Congress. He also ruled that the way federal agencies implemented the policy violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which governs how government agencies create and enforce regulations.
The ruling was seen as a major victory for employers and immigration groups challenging the fee.
However, on June 12, Judge Sorokin issued an administrative stay of his own ruling, temporarily putting the fee requirement back into effect while the Trump administration seeks emergency relief from the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
As things stand now, US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) can continue requiring the $100,000 payment for H-1B petitions that are filed for, or can only be approved through, consular notification.
Why the next few days matter
The court’s temporary order is tied to a strict deadline. The government has until June 18 to formally seek a stay from the appeals court. If it misses that deadline, the district court’s June 8 ruling striking down the fee would automatically take effect again.
The Trump administration had already filed an appeal on June 11 and then asked the district court a day later to pause its ruling while the appeal moves forward. The case is now before the First Circuit Court of Appeals under the title State of California, et al. v. Mullin et al., No. 26-01699.
States challenged the policy
In December 2025, a coalition of 20 states filed a lawsuit in Massachusetts challenging both the presidential proclamation and the actions taken by federal agencies to enforce it.
The states argued that Trump had exceeded his authority, that the fee was effectively a tax that only Congress could impose, and that the agencies responsible for implementing it had violated federal law.
Judge Sorokin largely agreed with those arguments in his June 8 ruling.
Government says the fee is legal
The Justice Department has defended the policy and is asking the appeals court to let it remain in place. According to the government, the $100,000 payment is not an unauthorised tax. Instead, officials argue it is a lawful use of presidential powers related to immigration and foreign commerce.
The administration says it is likely to succeed when the case reaches the appeals court.
Other courts are hearing similar challenges
The Massachusetts case is not the only legal fight over the fee. In December 2025, a federal court in Washington, DC, sided with the government and upheld the fee in a lawsuit brought by the US Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities.
That case is currently being reviewed by the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, which heard arguments earlier this year in March. Another lawsuit, Global Nurse Force et al. v. Trump, is still pending in federal court in Northern California.
Immigration lawyers are warning employers to be prepared for more sudden changes.
With multiple court cases underway, the legal status of the $100,000 fee could shift quickly and sometimes with little notice.
What happens next?
The next major decision will come from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, which will decide whether the government can continue enforcing the fee while the broader appeal is heard.
Until then, employers hiring workers from overseas through the H-1B program may still have to pay the $100,000 charge. The case is State of California v. Mullin, filed in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts.