...
By Robert Alexander
Senior Crime & Court Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review a long-running challenge to a federal rule allowing certain spouses of H-1B visa holders to work in the United States, leaving intact a 2024 appellate decision that upheld the program’s legality.
Newsweek contacted immigration attorneys via email outside of normal office hours on Wednesday for comment.
Why It Matters
The Supreme Court’s decision to let stand a rule allowing certain spouses of H-1B visa holders to work in the United States preserves a key source of economic and family stability for thousands of immigrant households and the employers who rely on them.
Read More on News
By declining to hear a challenge from a group representing displaced U.S. tech workers, the justices effectively affirmed the government’s authority to grant work authorization to H-4 visa holders—a policy central to retaining high-skilled talent in a tightening labor market.
The outcome provides relief for families navigating long green-card backlogs and offers rare continuity in a politically charged area of immigration law that affects both the U.S. workforce and the country’s global competitiveness.
...
What To Know
In an order issued Monday, the justices denied a petition by Save Jobs USA, a group representing American technology workers who argued that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) overstepped its authority when it extended work authorization to holders of H-4 visas—dependents of H-1B skilled workers.
The court did not provide an explanation for its decision, consistent with its usual practice.
Nearly a Decade of Legal Challenges Ends
The denial marks the end of nearly a decade of litigation that began after the Barack Obama administration adopted the “Employment Authorization for Certain H-4 Dependent Spouses” rule in 2015.
The regulation permits spouses of H-1B workers who are pursuing permanent residency to obtain work authorization.
DHS estimated at the time that roughly 180,000 individuals would benefit in the first year and about 55,000 annually thereafter.
Save Jobs USA’s petition, filed in August 2024, asked the court to determine whether DHS could “grant work authorization for classes of nonimmigrants for whom Congress has refused to grant work authorization.”
The group contended that the agency’s interpretation of immigration law “creates a separate immigration system that subverts the one Congress put in place.”
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously rejected that argument, holding in Save Jobs USA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security that federal law gave DHS authority to permit employment for nonimmigrants in limited circumstances.
The appeals court said that a related 2022 decision upholding a work-authorization program for foreign students “squarely forecloses” the challenge to the H-4 rule.
While the petitioners hoped the Supreme Court would revisit the issue following its 2024 ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—which eliminated the “Chevron deference” doctrine that had required courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations—the justices left the D.C. Circuit’s decision in place.
Immigration attorneys said the outcome provides clarity for thousands of families navigating lengthy green-card backlogs.
A Win for Families, Debate for Policymakers
According to DHS data, more than 258,000 H-4 visa holders have received work authorization since the rule was enacted.
Advocates for immigrant professionals say that the ability of spouses—often highly educated themselves—to work helps retain skilled workers in the U.S. economy.
Austin Fragomen, founding partner of the global immigration law firm Fragomen, Del Rey, Bernsen & Loewy, told Forbes that allowing H-4 visa holders—the spouses of certain skilled foreign workers—to work in the United States “helps U.S. companies retain top global talent.” He warned that restricting such employment “would push skilled families to competing economies,” adding, “The last thing employers want is a new policy that makes it more challenging to hire or retain talent.
Critics, however, maintain that the rule undermines job opportunities for American workers. John Miano, counsel for Save Jobs USA and an attorney with the Immigration Reform Law Institute, argued in the group’s filing that “the power to define which classes of aliens may work in the United States is vested in Congress, not the administrative state.”
Immigration Policy and Political Stakes Ahead
The Supreme Court’s decision comes at a time of heightened political debate over employment-based immigration.
On September 19, 2025, President Donald Trump enacted a $100,000 fee for new H-1B visa applications, a move that critics say could drastically increase costs for employers and may discourage skilled foreign workers from seeking jobs in the United States.
Under the H-1B program—created in 1990—U.S. companies can hire foreign professionals in specialty occupations for three to six years.
Employers must attest that they are paying prevailing wages and have first attempted to recruit American workers. The program is capped at 85,000 new visas annually.
Newsweek spoke exclusively about the decision with New York-based immigration lawyer Michael Wildes, managing partner at Wildes & Weinberg, PC, author of Safe Haven in America, and an adjunct professor at Cardozo Law School.
"Firstly, this decision keeps the status quo in place: there are no changes to procedures and policies that have been in place for a decade. There are no new hurdles, no new forms, and no new fees for employers of H-1B workers and their H-4 spouses. Each H-1B extension beyond the sixth year comes with an H-4 extension and an H-4 Employment Authorization extension, just as we have been filing since 2015," he said.
"Next, keeping this program in place is a resounding win for the economic rights of women visa holders in this country. H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders are disproportionately women. Although not all H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders are permitted to work, those who are in line for a green card deserve the right to work independently, pursue their own careers, and otherwise participate in American economic life. The price of moving to the U.S. to support your spouse in a new job cannot be the denial of your right to work for years at a time.
"I must mention, however, that H-4 spousal work authorization, like many Obama-era immigration programs, is a Band-Aid on top of a much larger problem that can only be solved by comprehensive immigration reform. The H-1B visa and by extension the H-4 dependent visa are limited to six years, during which time the employer must start a green card filing. The employer may extend the H-1B beyond the six years if the H-1B worker is in the green card line and has not yet gotten to the front.
"If a worker is eligible for that extension, then their spouse is eligible for this spousal work authorization while they wait to reach the front of that line. The deep issue is that such a wait time can be years or even decades, particularly for applicants born in China or India. It is inherently unjust for our immigration system to keep a family on temporary visas for years while they wait their turn. Congress must take action to drag our employment-based permanent residency system into the 21st century.
"So yes—while we celebrate the Supreme Court's decision to preserve a critical economic lifeline to so many women and families in this country, we also must be emboldened to advocate for long-term reforms, not just short-term fixes."
For H-1B families, Monday’s decision represents a reprieve amid policy uncertainty. “The Supreme Court’s inaction leaves the status quo intact,” said Mehta. “It means that qualified spouses can continue working, businesses retain vital talent, and Congress still holds the power to legislate any changes it deems necessary.”
What People Are Saying
Cyrus D. Mehta, a New York-based immigration lawyer and adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School, said: “Despite the evisceration of Chevron deference, courts need not rely on an agency’s interpretation of an INA [Immigration and Nationality Act] provision in order to provide noncitizens with work authorization…because these statutory provisions are not ambiguous in the first instance.”
Jennifer Minear, president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), said in a class-action filing: “The delays that H-4 and L-2 nonimmigrants are facing needlessly place families in financial limbo. DHS has the legal tools and authority to grant work authorization to impacted individuals whose financial security is hanging in the balance.”
Jesse Bless, director of Federal Litigation at AILA, added: “The process to attain work authorization should not put families at risk of immense loss of income and instability. There are reasonable and immediate steps that DHS can take to make certain that visa holders meet requirements without imposing needless suffering.”
What Happens Next
With the Supreme Court declining to hear Save Jobs USA v. DHS, the D.C. Circuit’s ruling upholding work authorization for certain spouses of H-1B visa holders remains in place, effectively ending the legal challenge.
The decision secures continued employment rights for thousands of H-4 visa holders and brings short-term stability to skilled immigrant families and their employers. The Trump administration is expected to maintain the policy, though a future government could attempt to roll it back through new rulemaking.
Legally, the outcome reinforces the Department of Homeland Security’s authority to grant limited work rights under existing visa programs, even as long-term uncertainty persists in the absence of congressional immigration reform.
Update 10/27/2025, 03:51 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with comment from Michael Wildes.
Correction 10/27/2025, 04:39 a.m. ET: This article originally referred to the Trump administration as the Biden administration. This has been corrected.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines