Overview of Restriction Types

The United States currently maintains three distinct types of visa restrictions:

The legal engine: INA 212(f) plus a moving country list

The President issued Proclamation 10949 on June 4, 2025, then expanded and modified the framework in Proclamation 10998 on December 16, 2025. Proclamation 10998 takes effect at 12:01 a.m. Eastern on January 1, 2026.

USCIS has now issued more instructions interpreting the Proclamation. Employers and foreign professionals must understand how this new requirement works .

Who Must Pay the $100,000

Authority under INA § 212(f)

The proclamation rests on INA § 212(f), 8 U.S.C. § 1182(f), which empowers the president to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens” or impose “any restrictions” deemed appropriate on their admission. Importantly, this power governs entry at the border, not the status of people who are already inside the United States.  By its terms, the proclamation:

• Applies to foreign nationals outside the U.S. seeking to enter after the effective date after 12:01 AM (ET) on September 21, 2025
• Does not apply to extensions of status or change-of-status petitions filed while the worker remains inside the United States.
• Does not alter the validity of previously approved H-1B petitions or visas.

USCIS and CBP have both confirmed that the rule is entry-focused as it imposes a condition of admission, not a retroactive obligation for individuals already maintaining lawful status in the U.S.

What Happens with New Petitions and Travel?

A thorny question arises under the Proclamation when a worker already in the U.S. changes status to H-1B or is already in H-1B and changes employers after the effective date of the proclamation.  In both cases, the filing will be a new H-1B petition on behalf of the foreign worker.   Suppose a beneficiary has a valid H-1B petition and a subsequent employer files a new petition (“H-1B transfer”). While the worker remains in the U.S., the proclamation does not apply based on its express terms:

 Section 1.  Restriction on Entry.

(a)  Pursuant to sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), the entry into the United States of aliens as nonimmigrants to perform services in a specialty occupation under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b), is restricted….

(b) The Secretary of Homeland Security shall restrict decisions on petitions not accompanied by a $100,000 payment for H-1B specialty occupation workers under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) of the INA, who are currently outside the United States….

See, Restriction on Entry of Certain Nonimmigrant Workers, Presidential Proclamation (Sept. 19, 2025), issued under INA §§ 212(f) and 215(a), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(f), 1185(a).

Let’s parse this language. 

Textual Analysis

Section 1(b) directs DHS to restrict petition decisions for H-1B workers “currently outside the United States.” That condition attaches at petition adjudication, not at visa stamping.

Section 1(a) restricts “entry … except for those aliens whose petitions are accompanied or supplemented by a payment of $100,000.”

Section 2(b) says the Secretary of State “shall verify receipt of payment … during the H-1B visa petition process.”

So DOS has a role at the visa issuance stage, consular officers must confirm that the employer made the $100,000 payment if the proclamation requires it.

• What Happens if The Worker Was Inside the U.S. at Petition Filing

If the worker was inside the U.S. when the new petition was filed and adjudicated, Section 1(b) does not require the $100,000 payment.

When that worker later travels abroad for visa stamping, the petition itself was already adjudicated without the fee because the person was not “currently outside.”

Consular officers should not impose the fee retroactively, because DOS can only “verify” a payment where one is legally required under Section 1(b).

• What Happens if the Worker Was Outside at Petition Filing

If the worker was outside the U.S. when the petition was filed after Sept. 21, 2025, the proclamation requires the $100,000 payment at the petition stage. DOS must then verify payment before issuing a visa, and CBP must enforce it at the border.

Practical Concern

Even though the text supports exemption for those who were inside the U.S. at filing, DOS might take a broader view at consular posts, reasoning that  “Entry under this petition requires proof of the $100,000.” That would stretch the proclamation, but consular discretion is wide.

• Employers should retain proof of the worker’s U.S. presence at the time of petition filing (I-94, pay records, affidavits).
• Workers should carry this documentation to the consular interview to rebut any attempt to misapply the fee.
• If a consulate insists on payment despite the exemption, that could set up grounds for an APA or ultra vires challenge.

Risk Management and Strategy

At Zneimer & Zneimer, we advise employers and H-1B workers to:

1. Assess travel needs carefully after a new petition. Unnecessary international travel may create exposure to the $100,000 condition.
2. Document exemptions where possible. Nonprofit institutions of higher education, nonprofit research organizations, and government research entities often qualify for relief.
3. Prepare waiver arguments in advance if national interest justifications apply.
4. Monitor agency guidance. DHS and the Department of State are expected to issue further instructions on how consular posts and ports of entry will implement this rule.

Conclusion

Because the proclamation derives from INA § 212(f), its reach is limited to entry into the United States. Workers inside the country who extend or change status are not directly affected. But once a worker travels abroad, the $100,000 condition may apply when they return, especially if they reenter under a new employer’s petition.  We are waiting for further guidance.  Immigration law is often subject to rapid changes, and employers cannot afford to make mistakes. At Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C., we provide ongoing analysis and proactive strategy to protect our clients’ interests. Contact us today to review how this proclamation affects your workforce and to plan the safest path forward.

Executive Orders Talk To the Agency

An executive order directs the federal bureaucracy. It tells agencies how to interpret or enforce existing law. For example, a president may issue an executive order instructing the Department of Homeland Security to review fraud detection in the H-1B program. An executive order does not create new legal obligations for the public. It organizes how agencies carry out duties Congress has already assigned.

Key Change – New $100,000 Filing Requirement

Effective September 21, 2025 at 12:01 a.m. ET, any new H-1B petition must be accompanied by a $100,000 payment. This requirement applies to:

The immigration lawyers at Zneimer & Zneimer, P.C. carefully follow every development in USCIS policy. The latest Policy Alert, issued August 19, 2025 (PA-2025-16), clarifies several areas where discretion plays a decisive role, especially when an applicant has engaged in or supported anti-American or terrorist activities, when parole or admission applications were inconsistent with the law at the time, and in limited employment-based contexts like National Interest Waivers and EB-5 investor petitions.

The Factors USCIS Weighs

Understanding this requirement is critical for avoiding delays, denials, and immigration complications.

Why Does the Three-Year Service Requirement Exist?

The legal foundation comes directly from the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and its regulations.  According to the INA, a physician who received a J-1 waiver based on agreeing to serve in an underserved area may not apply for a green card until completing the required service.  The INA specifically prohibits a J-1 waiver physician from applying for adjustment of status until completing at least three years of full-time employment in a designated shortage area.

Federal regulations bar J-1 waiver physicians from filing Form I-485 until the service is completed and require physicians to submit evidence proving that they have fulfilled the three-year commitment before adjustment of status can be filed.

In other words, physicians cannot adjust status while still working toward completion of their waiver service. Filing early will result in a denial.

Physician National Interest Waivers (PNIW): Is There an Exception?

Some physicians pursue a Physician National Interest Waiver (PNIW) to obtain permanent residence without employer sponsorship. However, even for PNIW applicants, the three-year service completion rule applies. Specifically, the National Interest Waiver for physicians requires:

• The physician to work full-time in a medically underserved area or a Veterans Affairs facility.
• The physician to complete either three or five years of service (depending on when the petition was filed).
• The physician must complete the required service before adjustment of status can be granted.

A physician applying for a PNIW may file the I-140 petition before completing the service. However, the Form I-485 adjustment of status application cannot be approved until the physician satisfies the full three- or five-year service requirement.  USCIS will hold the I-485 pending until the service is completed.  There is no exception that allows a physician who has not completed the service obligation (whether for a J-1 waiver or PNIW) to actually receive a green card through adjustment.

To summarize the NIW and J-1 waiver interaction:

Scenario	Can Physician File I-140?	Can Physician File I-485?	When Can Adjustment Be Approved?
J-1 Waiver, regular green card process (PERM or otherwise)	After waiver granted, but only after completing 3-year service to file I-485	Only after 3-year completion	After service completed
Physician National Interest Waiver (PNIW)	YES, I-140 can be filed before finishing 3 or 5 years	Maybe: can technically file I-485 if visa bulletin is current, but it will not be approved until service is completed	Only after the full service is completed

Bottom line:

• I-140 can be filed while still completing the service.
• I-485 may sometimes be filed but cannot be approved until full service completion.
• There is no true exception that allows a physician who has not yet completed the full service to adjust.

Planning for Success with Zneimer & Zneimer P.C.

Whether pursuing a green card through a Conrad 30 waiver or a Physician National Interest Waiver, physicians must carefully comply with all service requirements. Filing for adjustment of status too early can cause delays, denials, problems maintaining lawful status, and if the case is approved prematurely, lead to rescission or denial of naturalization.

At Zneimer & Zneimer P.C., our immigration lawyers have extensive experience helping physicians transition from J-1 visa status to permanent residence successfully. We help physicians plan timelines carefully, prepare immigrant petitions, and strategize the best filing approaches while avoiding legal pitfalls.

If you are a physician needing guidance on your J-1 waiver, PNIW, or green card process, contact Zneimer & Zneimer P.C. today for a consultation.

Noncitizens are already registered if they submitted one of the prescribed registration forms listed in 8 CFR 264.1(a) and provided fingerprints (unless fingerprinting was waived), or if they were issued one of the prescribed documents listed in 8 CFR 264.1(b) as evidence of registration.

Forms that are considered Application for Registration Forms (8 CFR 264.1(a)):

Policies Likely to Reappear

• Increased Requests for Evidence and Denials: During Trump’s first term, USCIS issued an unprecedented number of RFEs and Notices of Intent to Deny, adding complexity to the approval process. This trend could continue, especially in business and family immigration, resulting in possible delays.
• Mandatory Interviews: Project 2025 favors reinstating in-person interview requirements for adjustment of status, naturalization, and visa applicants, which may further contribute to backlogs and extend processing times.
• Changes to Forms, Fees, and Filing: Anticipated changes could include updated forms and an emphasis on online filing. Pay.gov issues and unexpected fees, especially those tied to non-asylum applications funding asylum processing, may add unplanned expenses and confusion.
• Termination of DACA, TPS, and Humanitarian Programs: Project 2025’s recommendations target DACA, TPS, and other humanitarian protections, potentially impacting Afghan, Ukrainian, and other protected individuals.
• Reduced Asylum and Refugee Admissions: We expect stricter eligibility standards and lower quotas for asylum and refugee admissions, potentially slowing down humanitarian processing.
• Increased Employer Audits and Site Visits: FDNS site visits and audits may increase, affecting businesses that sponsor foreign workers under programs like H1B and PERM.
• No Deference to Prior Adjudications: Reinstating a policy that requires all renewal cases to undergo new scrutiny, Project 2025 rejects deference to prior USCIS approvals, adding potential hurdles to previously approved cases.
• Travel Bans and Security Vetting: Additional security measures, including intensified vetting and administrative processing, could lead to new travel bans and prolonged processing times.
• Public Charge Requirements: Project 2025 calls for strict public charge criteria, likely reintroducing Form I944 and its stringent financial requirements.
• Family Detention Policies and the Flores Settlement: Project 2025 aims to overturn the Flores Settlement, which protects immigrant children in detention. Ending Flores could lead to prolonged family detentions and potential family separations, sparking significant litigation efforts.
• Remain in Mexico Policy: The “Remain in Mexico” policy may reemerge, requiring asylum seekers from Central and South America to wait outside the U.S. while their cases are processed.

New Proposals from Project 2025

• Deportations and ICE Raids: Project 2025 advocates for expanded ICE operations and deportations, which could strain agency resources.
• State Cooperation with Immigration Enforcement: FEMA funds could become contingent on state cooperation with ICE, including sharing DMV and other state records.
• Stricter Eligibility for T and U Visas: Project 2025 proposes heightened eligibility standards for humanitarian visas, including the power to pause certain applications for backlogged visa categories.
• ICE and USCIS Restructuring: Project 2025 recommends aligning ICE’s mission more closely with immigration enforcement, proposing that USCIS focus primarily on screening and vetting functions.
• Elimination of T and U Visas: The elimination of visas for trafficking and crime victims under Project 2025 would limit relief to those actively cooperating with law enforcement, favoring the S visa as the primary form of relief.
• Detention and Bond Reforms: Project 2025 proposes strict guidelines for bond issuance, aiming to prevent noncitizens from “bonding out” before case resolution.
• Increased Security in the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP): ICE may further restrict student visas from countries considered national security risks.
• Merging Immigration Functions: Project 2025 recommends merging ICE, CBP, and USCIS functions to create a more cohesive enforcement body.
• Denaturalization and Criminal Investigations Units: The reinstatement of a denaturalization unit within USCIS, in addition to a criminal investigations unit, would aim to address fraud concerns in visa programs prone to exploitation.

Regulatory Agenda Highlights

• Public Charge Rule Reinstatement: Project 2025 supports a return to a stringent public charge rule, requiring applicants to provide extensive financial data via Form I-944.
• Reforming H1B and Temporary Work Visas: Proposed reforms to the H1B program aim to restrict eligibility to highly skilled, high-wage workers, reducing the perceived impact on U.S. wages.
• Restricting Employment Authorization: Project 2025 advocates limiting employment authorization only to statutory mandates, reducing competition in the job market.
• Ending Chain Migration and the Diversity Visa Lottery: Proposed merit-based reforms would replace family-based migration and diversity visas with a system favoring skills.
• Mandatory E-Verify and Repealing TPS: Nationwide E-Verify use could become mandatory, and TPS may be repealed, limiting temporary protections.
• USCIS Adjudication Changes: Ending COVID-era flexibilities, Project 2025 proposes stricter vetting and interviews for most immigration cases.

Zneimer & Zneimer’s Commitment to Supporting Our Clients

At Zneimer & Zneimer PC, we remain vigilant about these developments and prepared to support our clients through shifting immigration landscapes.

Legal Challenges: Recent rulings such as Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce overturning Chevron deference open new avenues for challenging agency decisions, enabling courts to scrutinize interpretations more closely.

Comprehensive Case Preparation: As scrutiny increases and delays mount, we are committed to robust documentation and strategic preparation.

For questions or concerns regarding the potential impact of these changes on your immigration status or business, please contact Zneimer & Zneimer PC at (773) 516-4100 or by contacting our immigration team. We are here to help you navigate this challenging environment with confidence and clarity.