California and 19 other US states filed a federal lawsuit in Boston seeking to block President Donald Trump’s $100,000 fee on new H‑1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers. The challenge is at least the third legal bid against the fee, announced in September, which sharply raises costs from the typical $2,000–$5,000 employers currently pay.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta said Trump lacks authority to impose the fee and that it violates federal law limiting immigration fees to amounts necessary to cover program administration. Bonta warned the charge would burden providers of critical services such as education and healthcare, worsen labor shortages and threaten service cuts. The states joining California include New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, New Jersey and Washington.
The H‑1B programme allows US employers to hire foreign workers in specialty fields; the tech industry, heavily concentrated in California, is particularly reliant on H‑1B hires. The White House, responding to other lawsuits, has defended the fee as a lawful exercise of presidential authority intended to deter abuse of the H‑1B programme.
Critics argue H‑1B and similar visas can be used to replace American workers with lower-paid foreign hires, while business groups and major companies contend H‑1B workers are essential to address shortages of qualified American workers. The US Chamber of Commerce and a coalition of unions, employers and religious groups have also sued over the fee; a judge in Washington, DC is set to hold a hearing in the Chamber’s case next week.
Trump’s order bars new H‑1B recipients from entering the United States unless their sponsoring employer has paid the $100,000. The administration says the order does not apply to existing H‑1B holders or to applicants who filed before Sept. 21. In the order, Trump invoked authority under federal immigration law to restrict entry of certain foreign nationals deemed detrimental to US interests.
Bonta’s office argued the fee far exceeds the cost of processing H‑1B petitions and is therefore unlawful, and said the Constitution prohibits the president from unilaterally imposing revenue-generating fees reserved to Congress.
