On July 24, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the Trump Administration's motion to stay a federal district court judgment that vacated the $100,000…
On July 24, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied the Trump Administration's motion to stay a federal district court judgment that vacated the $100,000 payment requirement applicable to new H-1B visa petitions. The ruling preserves the status quo established by the district court's judgment and provides continued relief to employers sponsoring foreign national workers under the H-1B program while the government's appeal remains pending.
In evaluating the motion to stay, the First Circuit focused on the well-established framework governing such requests, under which a party seeking to halt a lower court's judgment pending appellate review must demonstrate, among other factors, a strong showing of likely success on the merits. The appeals court concluded that the government did not meet that threshold. Because this factor is central to the stay analysis, the court declined to disturb the district court's judgment while the appeal proceeds through the ordinary briefing and argument process.
The practical consequence for employers is significant. So long as the district court's judgment remains in effect and unstayed, the $100,000 payment requirement cannot be enforced against new H-1B petitions. Employers may continue to plan sponsorships, budget for filings, and structure workforce strategy without accounting for the additional six-figure cost that the challenged requirement would have imposed. This continuity is particularly meaningful for organizations with active recruiting cycles, cap-subject filings, and pending petitions for specialty occupation workers.
Even so, the litigation is ongoing, and the First Circuit's order addresses only the stay request, not the ultimate merits of the appeal. Employers should continue to monitor developments closely, including any further procedural motions, the schedule for merits briefing, and the eventual decision on appeal. Depending on the outcome, the enforceability of the payment requirement could change, and companies should be prepared to adjust immigration compliance and budgeting practices accordingly. In the meantime, careful documentation of filings made during this window may prove valuable if the legal landscape shifts.
This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Clients and prospective clients with questions about H-1B sponsorship or the impact of this ruling on their specific circumstances should seek tailored guidance from qualified immigration counsel.