On August 2, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a rule allowing the spouses of H-1B visa holders to work in the United States. In doing so, the Court rejected a longstanding challenge which originated in 2015 from Save Jobs USA (“Save Jobs”), a group which represents U.S. workers.
This decision, which affirms a district court’s summary judgment in favor of H-1B spouses and the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), marks a monumental step toward safeguarding ongoing work authorization for certain H-4 spouses of H-1B visa holders in the U.S., ensuring stability for thousands of families and U.S. employers.
Background: A Long Running Legal Battle
The Save Jobs USA v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security lawsuit originated in 2015, when Save Jobs challenged a federal rule implemented by DHS during the Obama administration. The rule allowed certain spouses of H-1B visa holders (H-4s) to obtain work authorization in the U.S. Save Jobs argued that DHS exceeded its authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) and claimed that allowing H-4 visa holders to work would take jobs away from U.S. workers, particularly in the technology sector. Litigation was put on hold as the Trump administration considered rescinding the regulation, but quickly resumed with both parties filing motions for summary judgment once the Biden administration took office.
Multiple large technology companies and business organizations filed an amicus brief in support of work authorization for H-4 visa holders, arguing that eliminating H-4 work authorization “would not only siphon off U.S. gross domestic product, but gift that productivity — and the innovation that comes with it — to other nations.” In March 2023, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of the DHS to uphold the regulation. Save Jobs appealed the district court’s decision.
The Court’s Ruling
In affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of DHS, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit relied on recent precedent in the D.C. Circuit to reject the argument that DHS lacked statutory authority to authorize employment. The 2022 precedent case – Washington Alliance of Technology Workers v. DHS – upheld a rule allowing foreign students to remain in the U.S. and work after graduation. Thus, the recent ruling in Save Jobs v. DHS reaffirms that DHS has broad power to regulate the conditions of admission into the U.S. for visa holders.
The Court’s decision in this case is also significant, as it contained arguments surrounding the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which eliminated the longstanding “Chevron deference,” requiring courts to defer to federal agencies’ reasonable interpretations of laws that they enforce when ambiguous. Ultimately, the judges ruled that the end of Chevron deference for federal agencies did not invalidate DHS’s authority to issue employment authorization, as the INA is not ambiguous in its grant of authority to DHS.
Impact of the Decision: Relief for H-4 Visa Holders and Employers
Many employers and attorneys view the Court of Appeals’ recent ruling as a win, affirming both H-4 visa holders’ ability to work in the U.S. as well as DHS’ authority to issue employment authorization. Along with relying on binding precedent in its decision, the Court also rejected Save Jobs’ argument that the H-4 rule negatively impacts American workers. Specifically, the Court cited DHS’s argument that “even if every eligible H-4 spouse took advantage of the rule in the first year (the year with the most newly-eligible H-4 spouses) it would amount to less than 0.12% of the U.S. workforce.”
As a result of the Court’s decision, H-4 spouses can breathe a sigh of relief and know their work authorization in the U.S. is protected for the time being. The decision is likely to have significant implications on workers and employers alike, ensuring that H-1B families can live and work together and contribute to the U.S. economy, and that U.S. employers can continue to leverage international talent and address critical skill shortages.
Conclusion: A Strong Precedent for Future Cases
The Court of Appeals ruling, along with other recent favorable rulings, provide precedent to protecting dependent spouses, and potentially other groups including international students. As future challenges to work authorization arise, this case may serve as a defense. Seyfarth will continue to monitor developments in these cases and provide updates as they unfold.
