Several separate lawsuits have been filed in opposition to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) rule and Department of Labor (DOL) rule on H-IB visas, both announced by the Trump administration on October 8.

The DHS rule, set to become effective December 7, sets out revisions and clarifications to the regulatory definition and standards of the H-1B visa category, including “limiting the validity period for third-party placement petitions to a maximum of 1 year.” The stated purpose for the new rule is “to better ensure that each H-1B nonimmigrant worker will be working for a qualified employer in a job that meets the statutory definition of a ‘specialty occupation.'” DHS claims that this rule will strengthen the integrity of the program to ensure that H-1B workers “will not have an adverse impact on wages and working conditions of US workers.”

The DOL rule, effective immediately under the “good cause” exception for notice-and-comment rulemaking, amends regulations surrounding wages for temporary or permanent foreign workers on H-1B, H-1B1, or E-3 visas. Specifically, the rule targets “permanent labor certifications and Labor Condition Applications (LCAs) … under the Department’s four-tiered wage structure [1) entry; 2) qualified; 3) experienced; 4) fully competent] … to better reflect the actual wages earned by US workers similarly employed.” DOL proposes that these changes will enable the Department to “more effectively ensure that the employment of [foreign] workers … does not adversely affect the wages and job opportunities of US workers.”

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) filed a complaint Monday seeking an injunction stopping the DOL rule. The US Chamber of Commerce, together with organizations and educational institutions, filed a separate complaint Monday opposing both the DHS and DOL rule, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. And ITServe Alliance, together with other tech companies, filed a complaint last week challenging the DOL rule imposing higher wage rates and seeking an injunction.

Plaintiffs in these cases claim that despite the DOL and DHS proposed policy considerations, evidence supports that H-1B workers contribute to the US economy both directly through performing services and indirectly through their productivity creating new jobs for the domestic labor market.

These rules, and others proposed by DHS are in furtherance of an executive order to suspend issuing temporary worker visas. They could force 200,000 foreign professionals to leave the US when their H-1B visas become subject to renewal.