Second US judge blocks Trump’s $100,000 H-1B visa fee

The Story in Brief

A second US federal judge has blocked President Donald Trump's $100,000 fee on new H-1B visas. US District Judge Haywood Gilliam in Oakland, California, ruled on 30 September that US Citizenship and Immigration Services and the State Department failed to follow required rule-making procedures before implementing the charge. Gilliam granted a request from a coalition of unions, employers and nonprofits to block the fee while their lawsuit proceeds.

Second US judge blocks Trump's $100,000 H-1B visa fee

The fee was first blocked in June by a federal judge in Boston in a separate case brought by 20 states, a ruling a Boston appeals court upheld in July. The White House extended the $100,000 fee, which was set to expire on 21 September, through September 2027. Separately, the Department of Homeland Security has proposed making a roughly $103,000 fee permanent through formal rule-making. The US Chamber of Commerce has filed a third lawsuit challenging the fee. For Indian professionals, who account for about 71% of H-1B approvals, the rulings leave the future cost of new visas uncertain.

Update, 3 October 2026: Hindustan Times reports that Judge Gilliam also blocked the fee's extension issued in September 2026. The outlet adds that the ruling bars USCIS and Customs and Border Protection from enforcing the charge until notice-and-comment rulemaking is completed. Hindustan Times also notes that the separate lawsuit by the US Chamber of Commerce remains pending before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals.

Indian Opinion Analysis

The Times of India, Hindustan Times and Livemint led with the procedural ruling, noting that agencies failed to follow notice-and-comment rules. Times Now highlighted Gilliam's appointment by President Obama and the plaintiffs' left-leaning legal group, framing the decision as a political setback for Trump. M9 News called it a 'major win' and a 'victory,' predicting repeal of the fee. Business Line and CNBC-TV18 provided neutral straight-news coverage. Greatandhra and Siasat quoted Kalpana Peddibhotla of the South Asian American Justice Collaborative, who said Indian nationals bore a disproportionate share of the harm. Across all outlets, the ruling is uniformly described as temporary, with the broader legal battle over the fee still unresolved.

Coverage: 10 sources, 1 government-critical, 8 neutral, 1 sensationalist


Sources (10): timesofindia.indiatimes.com (neutral report), timesnownews.com (government critical), thehindubusinessline.com (neutral report), livemint.com (neutral report), m9.news (sensationalist), greatandhra.com (neutral report), cnbctv18.com (neutral report), cnbctv18.com (2) (neutral report), siasat.com (neutral report), hindustantimes.com (neutral report)

This brief was synthesised by AI from the 10 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Methodology and corrections.

Ask their opinion on this story
They have read this article, our coverage, and the web.
AI simulations of historical figures. Responses are generated from the historical record, not authentic statements.

0 Votes: 0 Upvotes, 0 Downvotes (0 Points)

Share your opinion

Sign in to comment

Comments are open to readers with an Indian Opinion account. We email you a 6-digit code; there is no password.

Sign in to comment

Loading Next Post...
Search Trending
Ask their opinion
Loading

Signing-in 3 seconds...

Signing-up 3 seconds...

All fields are required.