A US federal judge has struck down a Trump administration policy that suspended immigrant visa issuance for nationals of 75 countries, including Pakistan. US District Judge Jeannette Vargas in Manhattan ruled on Friday that the State Department policy exceeded Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s legal authority. She called the policy “patently unlawful” and said it violated federal immigration law. The decision targets a State Department suspension that took effect on January 21, 2026. The measure had blocked immigrant visa issuance for Pakistanis and nationals of 74 other countries. Importantly, the policy concerned immigrant visas. It was separate from restrictions covering some non-immigrant visa categories. Judge Rejects Nationality-Based Visa Freeze Vargas said federal law limits the secretary of state’s authority over how consular officers process individual immigrant visa applications. “The Policy, which categorically prohibits the issuance of immigrant visas based upon the nationality of the applicant, represents a direct abrogation of this statutory scheme,” she wrote. The court also set aside visa denials based solely on the 75-country policy. This clears the way for affected applications to return to individual assessment under existing immigration law. Read More: Visa and Mastercard May Face New Challenge From PayPak The State Department introduced the suspension as part of a review of screening and vetting policies. It said nationals of the selected countries were “at a high risk for becoming a public charge and recourse to local, state and federal government resources in the United States.” The department had not immediately commented on Friday’s ruling. Pakistan Among 75 Countries Affected Pakistan appeared on the State Department’s official list alongside Bangladesh and several other Asian countries. The suspension also covered Brazil, Colombia and Uruguay in Latin America. Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina were among the affected Balkan states. Many countries across Africa, the Middle East and the Caribbean also appeared on the list. Read More: New US Visa Bond Targets 50 Countries: Is Pakistan on the List? The policy created uncertainty for people seeking permanent residence through family and employment-based immigration routes. Vargas, who former President Joe Biden appointed to the federal bench, issued the decision in a lawsuit challenging the suspension. Catholic Legal Immigration Network and African Communities Together brought the case with affected applicants. US citizens sponsoring relatives from designated countries also joined the legal challenge. Ruling Comes Amid Wider Immigration Crackdown The visa suspension formed part of President Donald Trump’s wider immigration crackdown. Trump has defended tougher immigration controls as necessary to improve domestic security and protect US resources. Read More: Italian Embassy Shares Key Update for Pakistan Visa Applicants Immigrant rights organisations have challenged several administration measures in court. They argue that parts of the crackdown violate free speech and due process protections. Rights groups have also raised concerns about racial profiling and the impact of tougher enforcement on ethnic minority communities. For Pakistani applicants, the ruling removes the blanket nationality-based suspension at issue in this case. Applicants will still need to meet normal US immigration requirements and any other applicable restrictions before receiving an immigrant visa.
US Judge Blocks Trump’s $100,000 H-1B Visa Fee in Major Legal Defeat
A federal judge struck down US President Donald Trump’s controversial $100,000 H-1B visas fee on Monday. The ruling marks a major setback for the administration’s efforts to restrict legal immigration. US District Judge Leo Sorokin issued the decision in Boston. Twenty Democratic state attorneys general filed the lawsuit after Trump announced the fee in September. The H-1B programme allows US employers to hire highly skilled foreign workers. It offers 65,000 visas each year. Another 20,000 visas go to applicants with advanced degrees. Successful applicants can work in the United States for three to six years. Before Trump announced the policy, employers usually paid between $2,000 and $5,000 in fees. The new charge increased costs more than twentyfold. Businesses, universities and healthcare institutions quickly criticised the move. Sorokin rejected the administration’s argument that the fee was a lawful penalty under federal immigration law. He concluded that the payment functioned as a tax. “Here, the substance and application of the $100,000 payment reveal that it is a tax, regardless of what the payment is called,” Sorokin wrote. The judge said Congress never authorised the president to impose such a tax. He also cited recent Supreme Court decisions that limit executive authority when federal law does not clearly grant specific powers. States Said Fee Hurt Recruitment of Skilled Workers The Trump administration defended the policy in court. Officials argued that immigration law gives the president broad authority to restrict the entry of foreign nationals when their admission could harm US interests. The administration said the fee would encourage companies to hire and train American workers. Trump had previously argued that employers misuse the H-1B programme. He said the system “has been deliberately exploited to replace, rather than supplement, American workers with lower-paid, lower-skilled labor.” The coalition of states disagreed. They argued that the fee would make it harder to recruit doctors, engineers, teachers and other skilled professionals. California Attorney General Rob Bonta led the lawsuit. He welcomed the ruling and said the policy threatened key sectors of the economy. “This tax was an attack on America’s ability to attract and retain the high-skilled talent that strengthens our economy and helps us meet critical workforce needs,” Bonta said. The states also argued that hospitals, universities and research institutions rely heavily on foreign talent. They said the fee would increase labour shortages in several industries. Visa Demand Fell Sharply After Fee Announcement Court filings showed that the policy discouraged employers from seeking H-1B visas. As of February 15, US Citizenship and Immigration Services had received only 85 payments of the $100,000 fee. The figure highlighted the dramatic decline in demand after the policy took effect. The White House did not immediately respond to Reuters after the ruling. However, administration officials signalled that they would continue defending the policy. White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers later criticised the decision. “President Trump has clear legal authority to restrict entry of any class of aliens he determines is not in America’s best interests, and that is exactly what he did,” Rogers said. The administration plans to appeal the ruling. The case could have far-reaching consequences for US immigration policy. It may also influence future efforts by presidents to impose financial restrictions without explicit approval from Congress. For now, employers that depend on highly skilled foreign workers have received a significant legal victory. The ruling removes one of the biggest barriers that the administration placed on the H-1B visa programme.
