Boston, Massachusetts – A federal judge has ruled against the Trump administration’s controversial $100,000 fee for H-1B visas, delivering a significant legal setback just as the former president pushes forward with his immigration policies. U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin described the fee as an unlawful tax that exceeds presidential authority, granting a victory to 20 Democratic state attorneys general who challenged the policy in court.
In a comprehensive 42-page ruling issued June 8, Sorokin argued that while presidents have considerable discretion regarding immigration matters, they cannot impose taxes without explicit approval from Congress. His judgment aims to clarify the limits of executive power in financial matters surrounding immigration.
“The nature of the $100,000 charge indicates it functions as a tax, despite its designation,” Sorokin stated. The ruling effectively nullifies the policy, which had raised stark concerns among employers reliant on H-1B visas to attract skilled foreign workers.
This ruling follows a pattern in which Sorokin has acted against aspects of Trump’s executive policies. Earlier, he imposed a nationwide injunction preventing Trump’s executive order on birthright citizenship, declaring it potentially unconstitutional under the 14th Amendment. That case is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
The judge’s decision was influenced by a recent Supreme Court ruling that classified tariffs imposed by Trump as also being taxes, further emphasizing the president’s lack of authority to unilaterally impose such fees. Sorokin pointed out significant procedural shortcomings in the administration’s actions, stating they violated established legal protocols by sidestepping notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures.
The Trump administration previously defended the H-1B fee by arguing it served as a penalty against foreigners deemed harmful to national interests, an assertion that Sorokin found unsupported. The H-1B visa program regularly issues 65,000 visas annually, along with an additional 20,000 reserved for advanced-degree holders, making it crucial for various sectors, including technology and healthcare, that seek global talent.
When the fee was introduced in September 2025, it caused immediate turmoil among employers who would be required to pay exorbitant amounts for such visas. The anxiety reached a peak when travelers on a flight from San Francisco to Dubai expressed fears of being barred from entry upon their return to the United States.
Compounding the controversy, the Trump administration launched the “Gold Card” visa initiative, which allows wealthy foreigners and corporations expedited entry into the U.S. for a hefty $1 million fee, further polarizing opinions around immigration policies within Trump’s coalition.
The ruling has ignited internal disputes among conservatives, with some, like Elon Musk, advocating for skilled foreign workers as integral to maintaining competitive advantages in industries like artificial intelligence. Others, including nationalists like Steve Bannon, argue that such programs dilute job opportunities for American citizens.
Following the ruling, the White House indicated plans to appeal, asserting the president’s authority to regulate immigration as necessary for national interest. Trump himself expressed frustration over the ruling, characterizing judicial challenges as obstacles to immigration reform.
As Trump’s administration continues to focus on stricter immigration enforcement, the ongoing appeals process for the H-1B decision raises fundamental questions about the balance of executive power and Congress’s exclusive taxing authority, underscoring the continuing legal battles surrounding immigration policy in the United States.