On Friday, July 24, 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the government's motion to put its $100,000 H-1B fee in effect while the challenge against it remains pending.
This means that the $100,000 H-1B fee is not currently in effect.
However, the final decision on the case remains pending with the First Circuit, and if appealed by the government to do so, the Supreme Court has authority to issue a stay or other emergency relief of the First Circuit’s order to put the fee back into effect while the case remains pending.
Background
The $100,000 H-1B fee was implemented by Presidential Proclamation on September 19, 2025.
According to USCIS’s subsequent guidance on the fee, the fee applies only to new H-1B petitions filed for consular notification on or after September 21, 2025. The fee does not apply to H-1B visas issued prior to September 21, 2025 or H-1B petitions filed prior to September 21, 2025. The fee also does not apply to H-1B transfer, amendment, extension, or change of status petitions filed and approved from within the US.
Litigation
Three cases challenging the H-1B fee are currently pending in federal court: Chamber of Commerce v. DHS, 25-5473, (D.C. Cir.); Global Nurse Force v. Trump, 4:25-cv-08454, (N.D. Cal.); and the instant case, State of California v. Mullin, 26-1699, (1st Cir.).
The $100,000 H-1B fee was in effect without interruption from September 21, 2025 until the first order affecting its implementation was issued on June 8, 2026 in State of California. In its June 8, 2026 order, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts put the H-1B fee on hold while State of California is pending.
The fee was placed back into effect on June 12, 2026 based on an administrative stay from the US District Court while the First Circuit considered the government’s motion to keep the fee in effect.
On July 24, 2026, the First Circuit denied the government’s motion to keep the fee in effect, and the fee was put back on hold. The First Circuit’s order included a statement that the government did not show it was likely to succeed on appeal of the case.
What’s Next
The other courts considering challenges to the H-1B fee have indicated that they will suspend decisions on their matters while State of California proceeds, so there is not an expectation that other cases will issue separate or conflicting orders.
The US government may appeal to the Supreme Court for emergency relief to allow the fee to go into effect while the full case decision is being considered by the First Circuit, or the final decision may be rendered by the First Circuit.
Take special note that although litigation remains pending, absent action taken by Congress or a successive Presidential Proclamation on the fee, the fee is already set to expire on September 21, 2026, per the Presidential Proclamation’s own language.
Key Takeaways for Employers
As of July 28, 2026, USCIS has updated its H-1B FAQ page to reflect that USCIS will comply with the First Circuit’s July 24, 2026 order putting the fee on hold, but if the order is later lifted, DHS still plans to collect the payment.
As this leaves a question as to whether and how the government may appeal the First Circuit’s order, employers are advised to work closely with an experienced immigration attorney to determine their best strategy for filing H-1Bs that were previously subject to the fee and for responding to outstanding Requests for Evidence (RFEs) related to the fee.
The KMK Law Labor & Employment team is closely monitoring developments related to the $100,000 H-1B fee and is available to assist employers with any questions related to employers’ H-1B filing strategy.
KMK Law articles and blog posts are intended to bring attention to developments in the law and are not intended as legal advice for any particular client or any particular situation. The laws/regulations and interpretations thereof are evolving and subject to change. Although we will attempt to update articles/blog posts for material changes, the article/post may not reflect changes in laws/regulations or guidance issued after the date the article/post was published. Please consult with counsel of your choice regarding any specific questions you may have.
ADVERTISING MATERIAL.
© 2026 Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL. All Rights Reserved
- Of Counsel
Olivia Kues serves as Of Counsel in the Labor & Employment Group with a focus on immigration law. She represents clients across a broad range of industries, including healthcare, professional sports, information technology, and ...
Topics/Tags
Select- Labor & Employment Law
- Employment Law
- FMLA
- EEOC
- Labor Law
- Department of Labor
- Immigration
- Wage & Hour
- NLRB
- Arbitration
- Diversity
- National Labor Relations Board
- Americans with Disabilities Act
- Discrimination
- Coronavirus
- FLSA
- Reasonable Accommodation
- Social Media
- Sexual Harassment
- Sixth Circuit
- Employer Policies
- Title VII
- Employment Litigation
- Religion Discrimination
- Transgender Issues
- National Enforcement Plan
- Employer Rules
- Workplace Violence
- Holiday Policies
- Non-Compete Agreements
- Overtime Pay
- Pregnancy Discrimination
- OSHA
- Employee Benefits and Executive Compensation
- Artificial Intelligence
- Privacy
- Department of Justice
- Independent Contractor
- Joint Employer
- Telework
- NLRA
- Compliance
- Paid Leave Laws
- Supreme Court
- Workplace Accommodations
- Federal Trade Commission
- Tax Credit
- Employee Tips
- One Big Beautiful Bill
- Litigation
- IRS
- Worker Classification
- Harassment
- Disability Discrimination
- Performance Improvement Plans
- Department of Homeland Security
- Immigration and Customs Enforcement
- Foreign Nationals
- Immigration and Nationality Act
- Medical Marijuana
- Retirement
- National Labor Relations Act
- Accommodation
- Inclusion
- LGBTQ+
- Sexual Orientation Discrimination
- Employer Handbook
- ADAAA
- ERISA
- Race Discrimination
- Unions
- ACA
- Affordable Car Act
- Technology
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Medical Cannabis Dispensaries
- Disability
- Whistleblower
- United States Supreme Court
- 401(k)
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
- Fair Labor Standards Act
- Employment Settlement Agreements
- Benefits
- Class Action Litigation
- Disability Law
- Gender Identity Discrimination
- Posting Requirements
- E-Discovery
- Evidence
- Paycheck Protection Program
- Environmental Law
- Family and Medical Leave Act
- Privacy Laws
- Securities Law
- Preventive Care Benefits
- Health Savings Account
- SECURE Act
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration
- Healthcare Reform
- Representative Election Regulations
- Older Workers' Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA)
- Affirmative Action
- Electronically Stored Information
- Equal Opportunity Clause
- Telecommuting
- Compensable Time
- E-Discovery Case Law
- Electronic Data Discovery
- ESI
- Occupational Safety and Health Administration
- Security Screening
- American Medical Association
- Attendance Policy
- Return to Work
- Seniority Rights
- Unemployment Insurance Integrity Act
- Classification
- Confidentiality
- Disability Leave
- Equal Pay
- Fair Minimum Wage
- Federal Minimum Wage
- Genetic Information Discrimination
- Media Policy
- Misclassification
- National Origin Discrimination
- Retaliation
- Social Media Content
- State Minimum Wage
- Wage Increase
- Employment Incentives
- HIRE Act
- Social Security Tax
- Taxation
- Antitrust
Recent Posts
- US Court of Appeals puts $100,000 H-1B Fee on Hold Again
- Asking Is Protected: Sixth Circuit Expands FMLA Retaliation Protections
- New DHS Rule Will Restrict Student Periods of Admission from Duration of Status to Fixed End Date
- TPS Haiti Termination: How Employers Can Ensure I-9 Records Remain Compliant
- A New Enforcement Era: What Employers Should Know About the EEOC’s 2025–2029 National Enforcement Plan
- Beyond Paid Time Off: The Legal Side of Holiday Policies
- EEO-1 Reporting on the Chopping Block: What Employers Need to Know
- DOL Proposes New Joint Employer Rule: What Employers Need to Know
- Arbitration Agreements Take a Hit: What the Sixth Circuit's EFAA Decision Means for Your Workplace Agreements
- Bourbon, Ballots, and Bargaining Orders: Sixth Circuit Rejects NLRB’s Cemex Framework
