South Asian Justice Collaborative Leads Lawsuit Against Trump-Vance Admin’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee

India-West News Desk

SAN FRANCISCO, CA — The South Asian American Justice Collaborative (SAAJCO) has joined forces with major labor unions, healthcare providers, universities, and faith organizations to challenge the Trump-Vance administration’s new $100,000 fee on H-1B visa applications, calling it unconstitutional and economically destructive.

Filed on October 3 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, the lawsuit contends that the executive order—issued on September 19 and implemented just 36 hours later—violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and unlawfully usurps powers reserved for Congress. The plaintiffs argue that the fee transforms the long-standing H-1B system into a “pay-to-play” model that would block access for skilled professionals and the institutions that rely on them.

The case, titled Global Nurse Force et al. v. Trump et al., is supported by a broad coalition that includes Global Nurse Force, the United Auto Workers (UAW) International, the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), and the Committee of Interns and Residents (CIR).

According to the complaint, the sudden six-figure charge has caused widespread disruption across key sectors. Hospitals warn they may lose access to much-needed doctors and nurses; universities report that the fee exceeds many teacher salaries; and research institutions caution that it could halt ongoing projects.

Among the individual plaintiffs are an Indian postdoctoral researcher in California and a UK-based scientist working in Appalachia, both of whom say their immigration status and careers were upended by the rule.

Represented by SAAJCO, Democracy Forward, and the Justice Action Center, the coalition argues that the administration’s vague “national interest” exemption invites arbitrary decision-making and favoritism.

The lawsuit seeks an immediate injunction to block enforcement of the executive order, restore the previous statutory fee structure, and prevent what the plaintiffs describe as a dangerous precedent that could lead to a “brain drain” and harm U.S. innovation, healthcare, and education.