The H-1B $100K Fee Lawsuit: Court Rulings Timeline Explained

A federal court vacated the H-1B $100,000 fee in June 2026 and the First Circuit refused to revive it in July. Here is the ruling-by-ruling timeline.

If you've been holding off on an H-1B offer, delaying a lottery registration budget conversation, or just trying to figure out whether $100,000 is actually a real number you need to plan around, the short answer as of 2026-08-17 is: the fee is not being collected right now. But "not being collected" is not the same as "gone," and the case is still moving through federal court. This post walks through exactly what each ruling said, what's still pending, and how to talk about the fee accurately if you're job searching, negotiating an offer, or advising someone who is.

This is a fast-moving case, and this page reflects the record as of the publish date above. Nothing here is legal advice — for how the litigation affects your specific petition, filing, or offer, talk to a licensed immigration attorney, not a blog post.

What the $100,000 fee actually was

In September 2025, a presidential proclamation attempted to impose a $100,000 supplemental payment tied to new H-1B petitions for workers being brought in from outside the United States. It was framed as a one-time charge layered on top of the existing filing fees, and it immediately triggered confusion across employers and candidates about whether it applied to transfers, extensions, cap-exempt petitions, and OPT-to-H-1B conversions. (If you're trying to sort out whether the fee touches your own situation as a current OPT worker, see does the $100K H-1B fee apply to OPT students and, if you work for a university or research hospital, cap-exempt edge cases under the $100K fee.)

Multiple plaintiffs — employers and industry groups among them — challenged the proclamation almost immediately, arguing the executive branch didn't have the authority to impose a fee of this size without Congress. That challenge is what produced the ruling that matters most here.

The court timeline, ruling by ruling

Here is the sequence of what has actually happened in court, in order:

1. The proclamation is issued (2025). The $100,000 fee requirement is announced for new H-1B petitions covering workers outside the US, alongside a separate 12-month restriction provision in the same proclamation.
2. Litigation is filed. Plaintiffs challenge the fee on statutory-authority and Administrative Procedure Act (APA) grounds.
3. District court vacates the fee — 2026-06-08. A U.S. District Court in the District of Massachusetts rules that the proclamation exceeded executive authority and violated both the APA and separation-of-powers principles, and vacates the $100,000 requirement outright — not just paused, vacated.
4. The government appeals and seeks a stay. The government asks the First Circuit Court of Appeals to stay the district court's ruling and let it collect the fee while the appeal plays out.
5. First Circuit denies the stay — 2026-07-24. The appeals court refuses to reinstate the fee pending appeal, meaning the vacatur stays in effect while the underlying appeal continues.
6. Current status — as of 2026-08-17. The $100,000 payment requirement is not being collected. The appeal on the merits remains pending, with no final resolution yet.

Why "vacated" and "denied a stay" are two different wins for challengers

It's worth being precise about the legal mechanics here, because the vocabulary matters if you're reading news coverage or a law firm alert about this case.

Vacating the proclamation means the district court found it legally defective and set it aside — the fee requirement has no legal force unless and until a higher court reverses that decision. Denying a stay is a separate, second question: even after a proclamation is vacated, a losing party can ask an appeals court to temporarily reinstate it while the appeal is decided, on the theory that the government would suffer irreparable harm otherwise. The First Circuit's July 24 ruling addressed only that second question — and it said no, the fee stays blocked in the meantime.

That's two separate rulings, both going against the fee, but neither one is the final word. The appeal on the underlying merits — whether the district court's vacatur was correct — is still working its way through the First Circuit as of this writing.

What this means if you're job searching right now

If a job description, a recruiter, or even an immigration attorney's older post references the $100,000 fee as an active cost of hiring, that information predates the June 2026 vacatur or hasn't been updated. As of 2026-08-17, employers are not required to pay it to file a new H-1B petition. That changes the calculus for:

• Candidates worried a startup or small employer "can't afford" to sponsor them. The $100,000 figure was frequently cited as a reason smaller companies would avoid H-1B hires. With the fee not being collected, that specific objection doesn't currently hold — though smaller employers still face the standard filing costs, and some remain cautious simply because the legal situation is unsettled.
• Anyone comparing H-1B against alternative paths. If you were pricing out self-sponsorship, O-1, or NIW as workarounds to the $100K fee, it's worth revisiting that math now that the fee itself is blocked — those paths may still make sense for other reasons, but the fee shouldn't be the deciding factor today.
• Employers who already paid. If your employer paid the fee before June 8, they should be keeping complete records — receipt numbers, payment confirmations, filing dates — because the refund process for those payments has not been finalized. This is reported, not confirmed, so don't assume either an automatic refund or no refund; confirm with counsel.
• Anyone with a petition pending during a future international trip. The litigation doesn't remove the general risks of traveling internationally while a petition is pending — see traveling while your H-1B $100K-affected petition is pending for that separate issue.

The part of the proclamation that isn't in litigation

It's easy to conflate everything in the original proclamation with the fee lawsuit, but they're not the same thing. The proclamation also included a separate 12-month restriction provision, and that provision is scheduled to sunset on 2026-09-20 unless the administration extends it. That sunset date has nothing to do with the fee litigation — it's a built-in expiration written into the original proclamation language, running on its own clock regardless of how the First Circuit rules. If you're tracking this issue, keep the two dates and two questions separate: the fee's legal status (unresolved, on appeal) and the 12-month restriction's sunset (approaching regardless, on 2026-09-20).

Common mistakes

• Saying "the fee is dead." It's vacated and blocked pending appeal — that's different from a final, unappealable resolution. The appeal is still open.
• Saying "the fee is in effect." As of 2026-08-17, it is not being collected. Any source claiming otherwise is out of date.
• Conflating the fee litigation with the 12-month restriction sunset. These are two different provisions of the same proclamation, on two different timelines, decided by two different processes (court ruling vs. built-in expiration date).
• Assuming the refund question is settled. Whether employers who already paid get money back is reported as unresolved — don't tell a client or coworker it's guaranteed either way.
• Treating this as legal advice for a specific petition. Litigation status is public information; how it applies to your specific filing, employer, or timeline is a question for an immigration attorney, not a general explainer.
• Assuming the current blocked status is permanent enough to skip re-checking before you file. Because the merits appeal hasn't been decided, verify the fee's status again at the time you or your employer actually files, not just from what you read today.

How to track this going forward

Because the appeal remains pending, this is not a "check once and move on" situation. A few concrete habits:

1. Check USCIS's official H-1B fee guidance directly before relying on any third-party summary, including this one.
2. If your employer's immigration counsel sends a status update on the litigation, read it — law firms tracking this case tend to post ruling-by-ruling updates faster than general news coverage.
3. If you're deciding between visa strategies partly because of the fee, revisit that decision once there's a ruling on the merits, not just the stay denial.
4. Treat the September 20, 2026 sunset date for the 12-month restriction as a separate calendar item worth tracking on its own, independent of the appeal's timeline.

Frequently asked questions

Is the H-1B $100,000 fee currently in effect? No. A U.S. District Court in Massachusetts vacated the proclamation on 2026-06-08, and the First Circuit declined to reinstate it on 2026-07-24. As of 2026-08-17 the fee is not being collected, though the government's appeal is still pending, so the situation could change.

What was the legal basis for vacating the fee? The district court held that the presidential proclamation imposing the fee exceeded executive authority, violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and ran afoul of separation-of-powers principles by attempting to legislate a new fee without congressional authorization. Those are three independent grounds any one of which could support the outcome on appeal.

What happens if the First Circuit eventually rules for the government? If the appeals court reverses the vacatur, the $100,000 fee requirement could be reinstated for new cap-subject petitions, though the exact effective date and treatment of petitions filed during the gap would likely be addressed in the ruling itself. Nobody can predict that outcome yet, so treat any hiring or filing plan built on today's blocked status as provisional.

Can employers get a refund for the $100,000 fee they already paid? This is reported as unresolved. Employers who paid the fee before the June 2026 vacatur should keep complete payment records, including receipt numbers and proof of payment, because the refund mechanism has not been finalized. Confirm the current posture with immigration counsel before assuming money will or will not come back automatically.

Is the 12-month restriction in the same proclamation still active? Yes, and it is a separate legal question from the fee litigation. The proclamation's 12-month restriction is scheduled to sunset on 2026-09-20 unless the administration extends it, so it is currently still in force independent of whatever happens with the $100,000 fee on appeal.

Trying to figure out how any of this affects your own job search or offer timeline? F1Jobs can help you think through the practical side while you confirm the legal specifics with your attorney or DSO.