Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in TRO

by

people-4009327_1280On September 24, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a proposed rule that would change the current selection process for selecting H-1B visa petitions subject to the annual numerical limits established by the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Under the proposed rule, the current random lottery system would be replaced with a wage-based selection process that prioritizes the selection of H-1B workers offered higher salaries by sponsoring employers.

The goal is to better align the H-1B program with U.S. labor market needs by increasing the chances of selection for higher-paid, and presumably higher-skilled, foreign workers. This change aims to reduce the potential for abuse in the system, discourage mass low-wage registrations, and ensure that the most economically valuable positions are filled through the H-1B program.

What may change

Currently, the U.S. government selects H-1B visa petitions through a randomized lottery system due to the annual numerical cap on available visas. Employers first submit electronic registrations for each prospective H-1B worker during a designated registration period, typically held in March. Because the demand for H-1B visas consistently exceeds the supply, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) conducts a lottery to determine which petitions can proceed with applying for H-1B visas.

There are two separate caps under the H-1B program: the regular cap of 65,000 visas and an additional 20,000 visas reserved for individuals who hold advanced degrees from U.S. institutions (commonly referred to as the master’s cap). All registered beneficiaries, including those with U.S. advanced degrees, are first entered into the regular cap lottery. After 65,000 are selected, those with U.S. master’s degrees who were not chosen in the initial round are entered into a second lottery for one of the 20,000 advanced degree slots.

This current system does not prioritize applicants based on wage levels, qualifications, or skills. Selection is purely random as long as the minimum eligibility requirements are met.

However, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is proposing changes that would shift the selection process to favor higher-paid workers.

Continue reading

by

ai-generated-9069946_1280The legal immigration landscape was shaken once again late Friday evening when the President issued a new proclamation barring new H-1B workers from entering the United States—unless their employers pay a $100,000 fee for each sponsored employee.

The proclamation took effect at 12:01 a.m. EDT on Sunday, September 21, and will remain in effect until a court order halts its implementation.

Emergency Litigation

A surge of emergency lawsuits is expected to be filed by impacted H-1B workers and their sponsoring employers, seeking a nationwide injunction to stop the implementation of the executive order. A court could issue an injunction as early as Monday. We will provide litigation updates as they develop in the coming days.

Highlights of the Executive Order

  • Effective today September 21, 2025, certain H-1B workers will be denied entry into the United States unless their employer pays a $100,000 fee on their behalf, according to the proclamation signed by President Trump late Friday.
  • Application: The ban on entry and the associated fee requirement applies only to any new H-1B visa petitions submitted after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025. This includes the 2026 lottery, and any other H-1B petitions submitted after 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on September 21, 2025.
  • The proclamation does not apply to:
    • any previously issued H-1B visas, or any petitions submitted prior to 12:01 a.m. eastern daylight time on Sept. 21, 2025.
    • does not change any payments or fees required to be submitted in connection with any H-1B renewals. The fee is a one-time fee on submission of a new H-1B petition.
    • does not prevent any holder of a current H-1B visa from traveling in and out of the United States.
  • Misuse of B Visas: The proclamation warns that individuals with approved H-1B petitions should not misuse B visas to enter the U.S. for jobs that start before October 1, 2026.
  • National Interest Exemptions: The proclamation grants the Department of Homeland Security authority to issue exemptions for individuals, specific employers, or workers in designated industries—if the agency determines that the H-1B employment serves the national interest and poses no threat to U.S. security or public welfare.
  • Termination: Absent a court order, this restriction will remain in effect for 12 months but may be extended based on recommendations from federal immigration agencies. An extension would continue the ban for individuals approved under the FY 2027 H-1B cap.
  • Changes to the Prevailing Wage: Besides restricting H-1B entry, the proclamation directs the Department of Labor to revise prevailing wage levels and prioritize H-1B approvals to high-skilled, high-paid H-1B workers.

In the hours after the proclamation was issued, chaos unfolded as H-1B visa holders, advised by their employers and legal counsel, abandoned flights and canceled international travel due to uncertainty about how the proclamation would be enforced at the U.S. border.

Adding to the uncertainty was the absence of clear guidance from immigration authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP), about how the proclamation is to be enforced against current H-1B visa holders and approved beneficiaries.

Continue reading

by
Gavin_Newsom_by_Gage_Skidmore

Attribution: Gage Skidmore

On Friday July 11, 2025, a federal judge ruled that the government’s ongoing immigration raids in Southern California and its denial of legal counsel to detained immigrants likely violates the Constitution.

In so ruling, the court issued two temporary restraining orders (TROs) barring the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies from continuing these actions in the counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Ventura, Riverside, San Bernardino, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. (Pedro Vasquez Perdomo v. Kristi Noem (2:25-cv-05605)

The first TRO prohibits immigration agents from stopping individuals without reasonable suspicion and bars law enforcement from relying solely on the following factors—alone or in combination—to form reasonable suspicion for a stop including (1) apparent race or ethnicity (2) speaking Spanish or English with an accent (3) presence in a particular location like a bus stop, car wash, day laborer pick up site, or agricultural site, or (4) the type of work the person does.

The second TRO orders DHS to provide access to counsel on weekdays, weekends, and holidays for those who are detained in B-18, the basement of a federal building in downtown Los Angeles located at 300 North Los Angeles Street.

It further requires immigration officials to develop guidance on how agents and officers should determine whether “reasonable suspicion” exists when conducting stops and to implement training for officers involved in immigration operations.

In addition to immigration officers, the TROs apply to the FBI and Justice Department, who are named in the lawsuit and are involved in immigration enforcement actions.

Continue reading

by

passport-8621284_1280

Harvard Travel Ban Blocked by Federal Judge

Earlier this month President Trump had signed an Executive Order suspending the entry of all nonimmigrants and exchange visitors attending Harvard University, for a period of 6 months starting June 4th (the effective date of the proclamation).

Those affected by the executive order were F, J, and M visa holders outside of the United States as of the date of the proclamation. The suspension did not apply to nonimmigrants entering the United States to attend other universities.

Shortly after the executive order was issued, a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction, temporarily halting its enforcement until the court can rule on the merits of the case.

Following the court’s actions, the State Department ordered embassies and consulates around the world to resume visa processing for Harvard University students and exchange visitors.

As a result, Harvard students can breathe easier. While the preliminary injunction remains in effect, consulates are barred from denying visas to Harvard students and exchange visitors, and visa holders attending Harvard cannot be refused entry to the United States.

For more information, please click here.

Continue reading

by

beverly-kimberly-tfiGOGEmJVI-unsplash-scaledOn June 4, 2025, President Trump continued his ongoing assault on Harvard University with a new Executive Order entitled, “Enhancing National Security by Addressing Risks at Harvard University.”

Effective June 4th, the order suspends the entry of all nonimmigrants and exchange visitors bound for Harvard University for a period of 6 months, citing national security concerns over Harvard’s failure to police foreign students and ensure that foreign nationals admitted on student and exchange visitor visas remain in compliance with Federal law.

The executive order also accuses Harvard of having extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries including China.

Who is affected?

All nonimmigrants who enter or attempt to enter the United States to begin attending Harvard University through the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) after the effective date of the proclamation (June 4, 2025).

The executive order further empowers the Secretary of State Marco Rubio to consider in his discretion whether foreign nationals who currently attend Harvard University and are in the United States pursuant to F, M, or J visas, should have their visas revoked pursuant to the proclamation.

Who is not affected?

The suspension does not impact Harvard students who are already inside the United States with a valid student visa as of the effective date of the proclamation.

The suspension also does not apply to any alien who enters the United States to attend other universities through the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP).

It also does not apply to any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their designated representatives.

Impact on Harvard Students Currently in the United States

The executive order does not:

  • Restrict change or extension of status applications filed with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
  • Revoke existing visas, I-94, or STEM OPT work authorization status for students currently in the United States

Continue reading

by

united-states-8911597_1280After months of speculation and buildup, President Trump’s long-anticipated travel ban has finally arrived.

Issued by executive order on June 4th President Trump’s travel ban entitled “Restricting the Entry of Foreign Nationals to Protect the United States from Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats,” closely mirrors the leaked draft that first surfaced in early March through the New York Times.

That draft hinted at sweeping restrictions targeting so-called “red,” “orange,” and “yellow” countries—coded designations that formed the backbone of President Trump’s proposed directive.

While there are notable differences, as predicted, the administration has framed the ban as a national security measure, but critics argue it remains susceptible to being challenged or overturned through lawsuits that may soon be filed in federal court.

Here’s what you need to know.

President Trump’s travel ban goes into effect today Monday June 9, 2025, at 12:01 am Eastern Daylight time.

Who it Affects

Full Suspension on Nationals from Countries of Concern

The travel ban temporarily suspends the entry of both immigrants and non-immigrants from 12 designated countries who are outside the United States and do not have a valid visa on the effective date of the proclamation, including Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, the Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen.

However, several key exceptions apply for lawful permanent residents (LPRs), immediate family members of U.S. citizens, dual nationals, athletes and teams competing in major international sporting events such as the World Cup and the Olympics, and others (a full list of exceptions is provided below).

Continue reading

by

manu-ros-wvlwZ00eIRk-unsplash-scaledIn recent days, the Trump administration has launched an aggressive campaign targeting international students studying at colleges and universities throughout the United States.

These attacks escalated Thursday last week when the administration first announced that it would be halting Harvard University’s ability to enroll international students by revoking their Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification—a certification that is necessary for U.S. schools to enroll and issue Forms I-20 to F and M international students.

The move sent shockwaves throughout the academic community because it meant Harvard could no longer enroll foreign students, and its more than 7,000 existing international students would be required to transfer or lose their legal status in the United States.

According to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, such drastic steps were taken due to Harvard’s alleged failure to comply with Student Exchange Visa Program (SEVP) regulations, as well as “encouraging and allowing antisemitic and anti-American violence to rage on its campus and coordinating with Chinese Communist Party officials on training that undermined American national security.”

Less than 24 hours later, Harvard filed a lawsuit in federal court requesting and obtaining a temporary restraining order to block the Trump administration from cutting off its ability to enroll foreign students. The judge found that absent the court order, Harvard would “suffer immediate and irreparable injury.”

Today, that same judge granted Harvard a preliminary injunction extending Harvard’s ability to maintain its SEVP certification intact while the lawsuit moves forward in federal court. This action effectively protects Harvard’s students and allows them to remain in the United States.

Continue reading

by

criminal-8444883_1280The unthinkable has now become a reality. In a recent court filing, the U.S. government disclosed that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has agreed to disclose protected tax records to aid Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in the mass deportation of undocumented immigrants.

The existence of this agreement was initially reported by the New York Times and was revealed in response to a lawsuit brought by Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and Immigrant Solidarity Dupage two immigrant worker organizations, against the IRS to prevent them from engaging in the unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information for purposes of immigration enforcement.

Under the terms of the deal, ICE officials can request information from the IRS about undocumented immigrants they are investigating for failing to leave the country after receiving a final order of removal from a judge.

This news has caused panic among undocumented immigrants who do not want to file their taxes for fear of being deported.

Many will certainly be discouraged from filing their taxes as they have typically done using an Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN). An ITIN number is issued by the IRS to people who are not citizens and are not otherwise eligible to receive a Social Security number to comply with their tax obligations.

Continue reading

by

poster-7297156_1280

In President Trump’s latest legal battles, a federal judge from the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts has dealt a blow to the administration’s plans to fast-track the deportations of thousands of undocumented migrants with final orders of removal.

Today, federal judge Brian Murphy issued a nationwide temporary restraining order immediately blocking U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from deporting migrants from the United States to countries with which they have no existing relationship, without first providing them written notice and a meaningful opportunity to claim relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) for immigrants fearing persecution.

This decision was made in response to a lawsuit filed by a group of migrants challenging ICE policies that expedite the removal of undocumented immigrants released from detention to third countries.

The judge’s court order specifically prohibits the U.S. government from:

“Removing any individual subject to a final order of removal from the United States to a third country, i.e., a country other than the country designated for removal in immigration proceedings, UNLESS and UNTIL [the government] provide[s] that individual, and their respective immigration counsel, if any, with written notice of the third country to where they may be removed, and UNTIL Defendants provide a meaningful opportunity for that individual to submit an application for CAT protection to the immigration court, and if any such application is filed, UNTIL that individual receives a final agency decision on any such application.”

Continue reading

by

kae-ng-PZw1B7JFW5w-unsplash-scaled

We continue to have good news for international students. As you already know, on July 8th Harvard and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) filed a lawsuit to stop the government from enforcing new guidelines on international students that would prohibit them from taking online classes during the Fall semester, despite increasing coronavirus cases nationwide. The new guidelines announced by the federal Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) would refuse visas to students in schools that plan to teach classes fully online this fall and would bar these students from entering the country. Students already in the United States enrolled in schools teaching online classes would need to leave the country or transfer to a school with in-person instruction to keep their visas.

Since the Harvard-MIT lawsuit was filed, Northeastern university has joined the fight. In addition, many other universities across the United States have rallied together in support of their students, including the University of California school system, Princeton, Cornell, John Hopkins University, and the University of Pennsylvania. These institutions have filed amicus briefs supporting the Harvard-MIT lawsuit and/or filed lawsuits of their own in district court.

On July 9th Attorney General Xavier Becerra also filed a lawsuit on behalf of the State of California against the Trump administration to stop the government’s new policies from going into effect.

Like the state of California, many more states are expected to file their own lawsuits in the coming week.

Continue reading