A federal judge in Boston has struck down the Trump administration's $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers, ruling that the surcharge amounted to an unlawful tax that Congress never authorised. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin, ruling in a lawsuit brought by a coalition of 20 states, found that the executive branch had exceeded its authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and issue regulations. "The Court finds that the Policy imposes a tax on H-1B petitions without the requisite delegation by Congress," Sorokin wrote in his Monday ruling.

The H-1B programme offers 65,000 visas annually — with an additional 20,000 for workers holding advanced degrees — and is designed to fill skilled positions that employers struggle to recruit for domestically. Technology companies are among the heaviest users, and nearly three-quarters of approvals go to workers from India. Before the Trump administration's September 2025 proclamation, employers typically paid between $2,000 and $5,000 in fees per application. The dramatic increase had an immediate chilling effect: as of mid-February, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services had received just 85 payments of the $100,000 fee. The administration had argued the charge was a lawful monetary penalty under federal immigration law, but Judge Sorokin concluded that its substance and application clearly made it a tax, regardless of how it was labelled.

The ruling creates a complex legal landscape. A separate federal court in Washington, D.C. had earlier upheld a nearly identical order, and a third lawsuit has been filed in San Francisco by religious and labour groups, raising the prospect of conflicting rulings across three federal appellate circuits. A White House spokesperson confirmed the administration intends to appeal, saying it was "confident this order will be reversed."

Reaction from lawmakers cut across party lines, though with different emphases. Republican senators and representatives from rural states such as Alaska focused on the impact on healthcare workers and teachers in underserved communities, rather than the technology sector. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska called the H-1B issue non-partisan and noted the ruling came at a critical moment for school hiring. Some Republican lawmakers are pushing legislation to exempt healthcare workers from such fees entirely. Democrats broadly welcomed the ruling, with California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who led the multi-state coalition, describing the fee as "an attack on America's ability to attract and retain high-skilled talent." The Department of Homeland Security dismissed the ruling as "blatant judicial activism."

Indian diaspora advocacy groups in the United States also welcomed the decision, arguing it restores predictability to the employment-based immigration system and protects America's competitive edge in technology and innovation. However, some urged caution: Sanjeev Joshipura of Indiaspora warned that the administration could still create procedural hurdles for H-1B holders that fall within legal bounds. The fee is currently scheduled to expire in September 2026, but Monday's ruling — and the appeals process it is likely to trigger — will shape the programme's future well beyond that date.