Trump: Twenty US states warn that $100K H-1B charge puts hospitals and schools at danger
Trump: On Tuesday, more than 20 US states took action to stop the Trump administration’s new $100,000 H-1B visa fee, citing concerns that the move would disrupt hospitals and schools throughout the country and cut off a vital supply of highly qualified foreign workers.
For Indian professionals, who make up a large portion of H-1B visa holders and are essential to the US healthcare, education, research, and technology sectors—particularly in public institutions that states claim cannot afford the high new costs—the legal challenge is especially important.
The US District Court for the Northern District of California was asked to grant a preliminary injunction against the policy in the multistate amicus brief that supported the plaintiffs in Global Nurse Force, et al. v. Trump. According to the brief, the charge is illegal and against the public interest as it will exacerbate the labor shortage, depress the economy, and interfere with vital public services.
The $100,000 visa fee levied by the Trump Administration, according to California Attorney General Rob Bonta, “imposes needless and unlawful financial burdens on public employers and will leave essential positions in critical sectors unfilled.”
“This charge has been contested in court by my office, and today we are supporting a similar lawsuit. We will continue to battle to safeguard our top-notch hospitals, schools, and colleges, which prosper by drawing and keeping talented people from all over the globe,” he added in a statement.
On September 19, 2025, the Trump administration applied the historic cost to newly submitted H-1B applications after September 21. The policy, which is implemented via a number of Department of Homeland Security papers, gives the DHS secretary wide latitude to choose whether petitions are exempt or subject to the charge. States claim that this provision raises questions about selective enforcement.
With H-1B visas, US companies may recruit highly qualified foreign workers for specialized jobs that need a bachelor’s degree or more, such as teaching, research, medicine, and nursing. Many government and nonprofit research institutes are excluded to guarantee they can satisfy public service demands, even though Congress restricts the majority of private-sector H-1B visas to 65,000 each year, with an extra 20,000 for those with advanced degrees.
The states contend in their appeal that the $100,000 cost would essentially exclude public businesses from participating in the program.
They said that 74% of school districts in the US are having trouble filling available teaching jobs for the 2024–2025 academic year, especially in special education, the physical sciences, bilingual education, and foreign languages.
With about 30,000 individuals working on H-1B visas and almost 1,000 schools and institutions depending on H-1B staff to support teaching and research, educators make up the third-largest occupational category among H-1B holders.
According to the brief, K–12 schools, colleges, and institutions are unable to absorb an extra $100,000 per hiring since they are usually government or nonprofit organizations. States caution that this would erode the quality of education and have a direct impact on students by leading to bigger class sizes, fewer course options, and program cutbacks.
Similar repercussions would apply to hospitals and healthcare institutions. According to the brief, hospitals often hire doctors, surgeons, and nurses from working-class and low-income regions using H-1B visas. Approximately 14% of California’s population, or 11.4 million people, reside in locations where primary care is in insufficient supply. Over the years, about 23,000 H-1B doctors have worked in underprivileged areas across the country.
As the population ages and the need for care increases, the United States is expected to have a shortage of 86,000 doctors by 2036. States caution that a $100,000 cost would force many hospitals to operate with insufficient personnel since it would be financially unfeasible for them to acquire new H-1B healthcare professionals. Longer wait times, more mistakes, greater death rates, and even hospital closures might result from this, the brief warns.
The states contend that “a $100,000 fee for H-1B healthcare workers is simply not feasible at a time when many hospitals are already facing cuts in health insurance subsidies and reduced Medicaid payments.”
The brief emphasizes the program’s wider economic effect in addition to staffing shortages, pointing out that H-1B employees and their dependents spend billions of dollars in federal, state, and local taxes and are anticipated to contribute $86 billion to the US economy each year.
The attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin joined Bonta in submitting the amicus brief.
The Trump administration’s larger effort to restrict legal immigration paths coincides with the court challenge. The case’s conclusion might have long-term effects for Indian professionals’ access to US public-sector positions in research, education, and healthcare, since they comprise a significant portion of new H-1B applicants.