A second federal judge has blocked the $100,000 fee on new Cap-subject and cap-exempt (H-1B)The H-1B category has an annual limit of 65,000 new visas or statuses per fiscal year, plus 20,000 more for people with a U.S. master's degree or higher. Petitions counted toward that limit are cap-subject. Petitions from higher education institutions, their related or affiliated nonprofits, and nonprofit or governmental research organizations are cap-exempt.See it in the glossary visas, ruling Wednesday that the agencies carrying it out skipped required rulemaking steps. U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam Jr. in Oakland, California, barred U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the State Department from implementing the fee while a lawsuit by a coalition of unions, employers and nonprofits goes forward, Reuters reported.
The order comes in a separate case from the June ruling in Boston, and less than two weeks after the White House extended the payment requirement through September 2027. It applies while the lawsuit is pending and does not decide whether the fee is lawful.
What the Oakland court decided about the $100,000 H-1B fee
Gilliam, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, a Democrat, ruled that USCIS and the State Department did not follow the rulemaking process required before putting the fee into effect. The case, Global Nurse Force v. Trump, was filed in October 2025 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (No. 4:25-cv-08454), according to the court docket.
The plaintiffs asked for the order in December 2025, and the court heard arguments in February. They also asked the judge to certify a class of employers that they put at about 14,000. Reports published Wednesday did not say how the court handled that request or how broadly the order applies.
Steve Bressler, a lawyer with Democracy Forward, which represents the plaintiffs, said the decision “protects a system that was thrown into chaos overnight.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, Reuters reported.
How it fits with the Boston ruling
The fee had already been blocked once. On June 8, Judge Leo Sorokin of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts set aside the guidance implementing the payment in a case brought by 20 states, holding that it worked as a tax the executive branch lacked authority to impose, as we reported. The First Circuit declined to pause that ruling in July, and the government’s appeal on the merits is pending.
The two rulings rest on different grounds. Sorokin’s turned mainly on authority, with the finding that the payment was a tax Congress had not authorized. Gilliam’s, as Reuters described it, rests on the process the agencies used.
A third challenge is on appeal
A lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has gone the other way so far. Judge Beryl Howell in Washington, D.C., rejected the challenge on December 23, 2025, saying the fee fell within the president’s broad powers to regulate immigration. The Chamber is appealing, according to Reuters.
What has not changed
The September 18 proclamation still runs through September 21, 2027. Reports on the ruling did not say how Wednesday’s order applies to the extension or what instructions agencies will issue to employers.
The ruling also does not touch a separate proposal. In August, DHS proposed a $103,265 fee on cap-subject H-1B petitions through notice and comment rulemaking. Reuters noted that a final version would raise different legal issues, because the current lawsuits challenge the president’s power to set a fee on his own.
What happens next
Both district court orders can be appealed, and the government has already appealed the Boston ruling. Agencies usually post instructions after a court order, so employers and workers with H-1B plans can check USCIS and State Department notices before filing or booking travel. For background on the category, see the H-1B specialty occupation guide.