US Chamber Turns Trump Foe in Rare Split Over $100,000 H-1B Fee

President Donald Trump’s crackdown on the H-1B visa program for skilled foreign workers has drawn a rare challenger: the US Chamber of Commerce, the nation’s largest business organization that has rarely challenged his administration.

The Chamber’s lawsuit to block a $100,000 fee on H-1B workers shows how the fee is already disrupting hiring by the group’s members months before many would have to start paying up. And its decision to file in DC bucks a trend of bringing most lawsuits against the government outside of Washington, showing that the Chamber is aiming for a court win that will survive Supreme Court second-guessing, attorneys and legal experts say.

The steep hike in labor costs is affecting hiring plans for tech and other employers for next year’s visa lottery, said Carl Hampe, a partner at Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, LLP. That’s impacting enough Chamber members for them to push the organization to act, he said.

“It’s not going to take on this administration on a signature issue without a significant expression of member interest behind it,” Hampe said.

A lawsuit in favor of business interests isn’t surprising from the Chamber, which has its own litigation arm. But it’s the first time the group, historically considered a Republican ally, has chosen to sue the administration during Trump’s second term. The Chamber declined to comment.

Neil Bradley, the Chamber’s chief policy officer, writing the same day the Chamber filed suit, complimented Trump’s work on immigration, but said more legal immigration is needed to boost the economy. He said that the H-1B fee “moves us in the wrong direction by making it cost prohibitive for many businesses, especially small business and start-ups, to utilize the program.”

Surprise Fees

The White House unveiled the $100,000 fee in a surprise Sept. 19 proclamation two days before it took effect. After initial panic among H-1B workers, administration officials clarified that it would only apply to newly filed petitions. For most businesses, that meant they’d face the charge on applications filed after the next visa lottery in the coming spring. Colleges and nonprofit research organizations exempt from an annual cap could immediately be on the hook for the fee, however.

The Trump administration said the charge would address abuses of the H-1B program, but two different lawsuits have argued that the fee would cut off smaller employers’ access to essential talent and tilt the program in favor of deep-pocketed businesses. Even corporate giants like Walmart have hit pause on hiring of H-1B workers.

“It was intended to deliver an impact, which it has, right?” said Xiao Wang, founder and CEO of Boundless Immigration, an immigration services provider that assists individuals and businesses navigating the US visa system.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services unveiled a payment option this week and clarified that the fee wouldn’t apply to workers like recent college graduates who switch to H-1B status in the US. Plaintiffs who filed the first legal challenge said the latest guidance didn’t change their litigation plans or the core issue with the fee—that it imposes a new immigration costs without congressional authorization.

Venue Selection

The Washington federal trial court has been the most popular venue for lawsuits challenging the second Trump administration. As of Wednesday, at least 92 lawsuits had been filed there challenging the use of Trump’s executive authority, including the H-1B lawsuit from the Chamber.

The Chamber sued the Biden administration mostly outside of Washington. US District Judge Mark Pittman, a Trump appointee in Fort Worth, Texas, in 2024 repeatedly tried to move a Chamber-led lawsuit outside of his court to DC, but was reversed by the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Pittman’s court remains a magnet for outside cases. He suggested last week that major corporations like Apple move their headquarters to the city, given their proclivity for filing there.

Paul Gugliuzza, a University of Texas at Austin law professor who’s studied judge shopping, said the moves made by the Chamber and other groups to get challenges before conservative judges outside of Washington is what makes their decision to file in DC notable.

“We’re only having this conversation because the system has been abused in such a way that the normal case looks exceptional,” Gugliuzza said. “And I would say this is a very normal choice of forum.”

Christian Helmers, a Santa Clara University economics professor, helped conduct a survey of early litigation against the second Trump administration and found plaintiffs weren’t engaging in judge shopping tactics. He said there’s a difference between judge shopping—trying to get a case before a favorable judge—and forum shopping, which can take into account a full court’s composition.

He said that while a majority of the active district judges are Democratic appointees, the court is ideologically balanced once the senior judges who still hear cases are taken into account. “Whenever you see a civil case filed in Washington, DC, there’s no forum shopping, no judge shopping,” Helmers said.

High Court Success

The Chamber’s H-1B case will be heard by Senior US District Judge Beryl Howell, a Barack Obama appointee who previously served as the court’s chief judge, who hasn’t yet set any deadlines in the case.

The Chamber argues that imposing the fee exceeded the president’s authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act. Filing in DC means the Chamber’s case will be heard in a circuit with the most expertise in interpreting the APA, said Angelo Paparelli, an immigration attorney and partner at Vialto US.

“I suspect that was among the reasons it was done there,” he said.

Fragomen’s Hampe said cases in the DC Circuit “get tested by the best APA minds in the country.”

The Chamber also picked a forum where decisions have been less likely to be overturned by the Supreme Court, he noted.

“In the Ninth Circuit, you could win an injunction early, but you’re more likely to lose at the Supreme Court,” Hampe said.