Two Major Court Victories for Immigration: Court Blocks the $100,000 H-1B Fee and Strikes Down USCIS’s 39-Country Adjudication Freeze

This past week brought two important federal court rulings affecting employers and foreign nationals across the country. On June 5, a federal court in Rhode Island struck down USCIS’s broad freeze on adjudicating immigration applications for nationals of 39 countries. On June 8, a federal court in Massachusetts vacated the administration’s $100,000 H-1B filing fee. 

These decisions are significant, but neither is necessarily final. The government is expected to appeal both rulings and may ask the courts to pause them while those appeals are pending. For now, however, both decisions provide meaningful relief for affected employers and individuals. 

Below is a practical summary of what happened, who may be affected, and what to watch next. 

1. The $100,000 H-1B Fee Has Been Vacated 

Ruling: States of California, et al. v. DHS, U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts (June 8, 2026) 

Judge: Leo T. Sorokin 

Outcome: Fee vacated in its entirety as an unconstitutional, unauthorized tax 

What Was the Policy? 

In September 2025, the administration imposed a new $100,000 fee on certain new H-1B petitions. The fee took effect almost immediately and created major uncertainty for employers, especially those planning to hire foreign nationals from abroad. 

For many employers, the fee effectively put new H-1B hiring on hold. It represented a dramatic increase over the filing costs employers had historically paid and left many businesses uncertain whether they could move forward with planned cases. 

What the Court Decided 

The federal court ruled that the administration did not have legal authority to impose this fee in the way it did. In practical terms, the court struck the fee down in full. 

The court also found problems with how the policy was issued, including the lack of a normal rulemaking process. That mattered because the fee affected employers nationwide and had immediate consequences for hiring and workforce planning. 

As of now, the $100,000 fee is no longer in effect under the court’s order. 

Why It Matters 

This ruling matters most to employers that delayed or reconsidered new H-1B filings because of cost. It may reopen options that had become financially unrealistic under the new fee structure. It further allows flexibility to potential H-1B workers ability to travel abroad.  

At the same time, employers should proceed carefully. The government is expected to appeal and may ask the court to pause the ruling while the appeal is pending. Until there is further guidance, businesses should review case strategy with our immigration counsel before relying on the decision. 

2. USCIS’s 39-Country Adjudication Freeze Has Also Been Struck Down 

Ruling: Dorcas International Institute of Rhode Island v. USCIS, No. 1:26-cv-00132-JJM-PAS (D.R.I. June 5, 2026) 

Judge: Chief Judge John J. McConnell, Jr. 

Outcome: All four USCIS adjudication policies declared unlawful and vacated nationwide 

What Were the Policies? 

In 2025, the administration announced various country-based restrictions affecting nationals of 39 countries. USCIS then adopted internal policies that went further by pausing many immigration cases for affected individuals already in the United States. Specifically, USCIS implemented four distinct policies, largely through internal policy alerts rather than formal rulemaking: 

• The Benefits Hold Policy: A blanket freeze on adjudicating immigration benefit requests — including green card applications, work permits (EADs), naturalization, and other benefits — filed by nationals of the 39 affected countries (Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Laos, Libya, Mali, Niger, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen, Palestinian Authority, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Benin, Burundi, Cote d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Gabon, The Gambia, Malawi, Mauritania, Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Togo, Tonga, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe) 
• The Global Asylum Hold Policy: A pause on affirmative asylum adjudications for all applicants, regardless of nationality, creating backlogs that affected people far beyond the 39 designated countries. 
• The Comprehensive Re-Review Policy: A directive to re-examine previously approved immigration benefits for nationals of the affected countries, reopening cases that had already been decided. 
• The Country-Specific Factors Policy: An instruction to USCIS officers to treat an applicant’s country of birth or nationality as a significant negative discretionary factor in adjudications,  building in a presumption against applicants from certain countries. 

These USCIS policies affected a wide range of applications, including work permits, green card cases, naturalization matters, and certain asylum-related adjudications. For many people, the result was delay, uncertainty, and the risk of losing work authorization or other immigration benefits. 

What the Court Decided 

The Rhode Island federal court held that USCIS did not have legal authority to impose these broad adjudication freezes. The court struck down all four USCIS policies nationwide. 

Importantly, the court did not strike down the underlying travel bans themselves. Instead, the ruling focused on the separate USCIS policies that had stopped or re-opened immigration cases for people already here. As a result, USCIS can no longer rely on those policies unless a higher court pauses or reverses the decision. 

For affected individuals, this ruling may allow long-delayed cases to move forward again. That could include pending work permit renewals, adjustment of status applications, and other immigration benefits that had been stalled. 

Why It Matters 

This decision is especially important for individuals from the 39 affected countries whose applications were placed on hold and for employers waiting on work authorization or case movement for their employees. 

Still, the same caution applies here. The government is expected to appeal, and USCIS has not yet issued operational guidance on how quickly paused cases may resume. A stay could delay the practical effect of the ruling. 

Practical Takeaways 

Both rulings are important, but neither is guaranteed to remain in place without further court action.  

For employers considering new H-1B filings 

The court’s ruling removes the $100,000 fee for now. If your company delayed a filing because of cost, this may create an opportunity to revisit timing and strategy. Before filing, however, it is wise to confirm whether any stay or agency guidance changes the current landscape. 

For employers with workers from the 39 affected countries 

This ruling may allow some delayed cases to begin moving again, including matters affecting work authorization. Even so, employers should continue monitoring case status and compliance obligations carefully until USCIS confirms how it will implement the decision. 

For individuals with pending applications 

If your case was affected by the USCIS freeze, this ruling may be an important development for you. But you should not assume your case will automatically restart right away. The timing will depend on whether the government seeks a stay and how USCIS responds. 

For everyone: 

The broader point is that these rulings place meaningful limits on recent immigration measures, but the legal picture may continue to change quickly. Employers and individuals should stay informed and seek case-specific advice before making decisions based on these developments alone. 

This post is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is constantly changing. Please consult with an attorney regarding your specific situation.