A federal judge in Massachusetts has blocked the Trump administration’s $100,000 H-1B fee. While the case is important for employers, universities, hospitals, and foreign workers, it is also significant for another reason: It is the latest reminder that tax is becoming one of the courts’ favorite ways to talk about power.

About the H-1B Program

The H-1B program allows U.S. employers to sponsor foreign workers for temporary employment in “specialty occupations.” These typically require highly specialized knowledge and at least a bachelor’s degree or equivalent. We tend to associate H-1B visas with technology jobs, but the program also includes jobs in medicine, education, engineering, science, and other specialized fields. The program has limits, including an annual cap for most private employers, while exempting some colleges, nonprofits, and government research organizations.

Before the payment hike, H-1B visa costs ranged from $960 to $7,595, depending on the employer and petition type. The jump to $100,000 was framed as an immigration restriction aimed at curbing abuse and protecting American workers.

On June 8, Judge Leo T. Sorokin of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a memorandum and order in State of California et al. v. Markwayne Mullin et al., siding with 20 states that challenged the fee bump. The court granted the states’ motion for summary judgment, denied the government’s cross-motion, and vacated the policy in its entirety.

Summary judgment is a court's judgment entered for one party and against another. In a civil case, it's triggered by a pretrial motion seeking a ruling on the merits. Under Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, summary judgment is proper when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

A cross-motion is a formal request made in response to a motion already filed by the opposing party. It asks the judge to deny the original request and often asks the court to rule in their favor instead, which is what happened here. The government asked, in the alternative, that the complaint be dismissed.

But this is not simply about H-1B visas. The bigger story is how courts are increasingly using tax law to define the boundaries between........

© Forbes