The California ruling represents another adverse federal district court decision involving the $100,000 payment, which is already blocked pursuant to a in Massachusetts that is currently on appeal.

The court order does not affect the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) separately proposed $103,265 fee for H-1B cap-subject petitions, which remains in the rulemaking process and is not currently in effect.

Like the interim regulation, the final rule applies only to certain EAD applications filed on or after October 30, 2025. It does not affect automatic extensions for EAD applications filed before October 30, 2025. The final rule makes no changes to the interim regulation.

If implemented, the regulation is likely to spur longer processing times and an increase in requests for evidence and denials of Form I-129 extensions of stay, which could make it more difficult for employers to retain foreign sponsored talent.

DHS will accept public comments on the proposed regulation for 30 days after its publication.

This proposal is not currently in effect. Current OPT and STEM OPT application processes and fees remain unchanged unless and until a final rule takes effect.

DHS is accepting public comments on the proposal before determining whether to issue a final rule. ISSS is monitoring developments and will provide updates as additional information becomes available.

Because the September 2025 H-1B proclamation fee policy is currently vacated, the extended fee policy should also be blocked, meaning USCIS should continue to be barred from collection of the $100,000 fee until further notice.

There should be no change to the status quo at this time; however, if the government takes a different position regarding the proclamation extension and policies, there could be confusion until clarity is sought and provided by the courts. In addition, USCIS continues to appeal the district court decision that vacated the $100,000 fee policy, so departments and foreign nationals should be aware that changes to the status quo are possible with little or no notice.

The executive order calls for layoff-related information to be considered across H-1B filings, potentially increasing scrutiny of employers whose workforce reductions overlap with sponsored positions.

The executive order directs the secretaries of state, labor, and homeland security to consider whether an employer conducted layoffs within the prior year or plans future layoffs affecting similarly situated U.S. workers when adjudicating H-1B-related filings.

Employers could see additional scrutiny at multiple points in the H-1B process, including DOL Labor Condition Application (LCA) review, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) petition adjudication, consular visa issuance, and admission at the border.

Additional agency action may be needed to determine how the directive will be applied in practice.

For additional analysis, see ��ο��Ƶ’s immigration counsel’s

The State Department has paused immigrant visa interview appointments at consulates and embassies worldwide so that its officers can undergo training on new public charge screening guidance.

Nonimmigrant visa categories—including tourist, student, and temporary work visas—are currently not impacted by the pause.

The pause in appointments appears temporary, though a specific timeline has not been announced.

The postponement of immigrant visa interviews comes after DHS policy changes affecting public charge standards and a federal district court ruling that vacated the State Department’s earlier pause on issuing immigrant visas to foreign nationals from seventy-five countries.

For additional information, please see

The agency announcement does not provide details on the standard to be applied in the review, but it is expected that if an applicant’s online presence is found to contain information perceived by the government as derogatory, more extensive security screening may be triggered, resulting in increased delays and possible visa refusal.

An online presence review has been in place for F, M and J visa applicants since late June 2025; for H-1B and H-4 visa applicants since December 2025; and for all A-3, C-3 (if a domestic worker), G-5, H-3, H-4 dependents of H-3, K-1, K-2, K-3, Q, R-1, R-2, S, T, and U visa applicants since March 2026.

According to DOL’s description of the proposed rule, it would revise the minimum standards for PERM recruitment, strengthen rules related to U.S. worker layoffs and enhance employer non-discrimination rules. Details will not be known until the proposed rule is released for publication.

Once the proposal is published in the Federal Register, DOL will accept public comments for 30 or 60 days.

If the rule is finalized, it will mean that nonimmigrants whose employment has ceased before the end of their period of stay would need to depart the United States immediately, unless they have separate authorization to remain. In its proposal, DHS acknowledges that if the grace period regulation is eliminated, some affected foreign nationals could be issued Notices to Appear (NTA), the government’s first step in initiating removal (deportation) proceedings. The prospect of NTA issuance may be likelier for those in nonimmigrant categories that require an employer to immediately notify the government when employment of the foreign national has ceased, including H-1B, O-1, and P.  Department of Labor regulations and policies also require USCIS notification to end Labor Condition Application (LCA) wage obligations related to H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 employment termination.

The proposal does not have immediate impact. It will not take effect until DHS reviews the public feedback received over the 60-day public comment period and publishes a final regulation with a specific implementation date.

Visit if you wish to submit a public comment.