Trump’s updated H-1B policy triggered immediate alarm — and will lead to prolonged disorder

During his 2016 campaign for president, Donald Trump frequently asserted that his stance on immigration primarily targeted illegal or irregular immigration, welcoming those who would follow “proper channels.” However, those guarantees diminished as he entered his first term, although he still made rhetorical nods to legal immigration — needing to win over a business sector that remained wary of his nascent political movement.

At present, Trump and anti-immigration advocates like Stephen Miller have successfully focused on the pathway for international students and foreign workers holding visas like the H-1B. They’ve shaped a narrative that foreign-born workers are displacing those born in the nation. However, this extensive campaign now risks crippling multiple sectors across the economy.

The public’s understanding of the H-1B visa system assumes it brings in lower-cost (and, stereotypically, often less qualified) international labor, particularly within tech industries. This indeed has occurred; previously, certain outsourcing firms have captured substantial numbers of these visas, supported by studies indicating employers have exploited workers subject to legal constraints and far less able to pursue improved conditions or organize.

However, this aspect is merely part of the puzzle — a diminishing segment in recent years, as the Biden administration undertook measures to curb abuses, extending into the weeks preceding Trump’s inauguration. Conversely, H-1Bs are frequently employed to staff technical industries that struggle to source domestic workers with requisite skills or proficiency at needed volumes, mirroring the dependence of sectors like agriculture and construction on often undocumented labor for roles that locals cannot or will not fill. This includes tech, undeniably — and indeed the primary beneficiary is Amazon — as well as high-tech manufacturing, educational services, consulting, healthcare provision, and research, including ostensibly Trump-advocated initiatives like a domestic semiconductor sector, which is critically reliant on the visa.

Setting aside the disparity between the actual state of legal immigration and the broader perception, it has always aimed to shift the Overton window towards hostility against immigration. This lays the groundwork for staunch restrictionists like Stephen Miller to challenge every aspect of immigration into the country. His campaign commenced during Trump’s presidency but has intensified during his second term, with the administration effectively dismantling the refugee program, targeting family reunifications, and working to undermine the system that facilitates the influx of foreign talent to the US, ranging from students to workers.

This week, the administration revived a previous proposal to significantly favor high-wage earners within the lottery that dispenses 85,000 available visas annually, allocating four lottery entries to individuals with job offers or current employment offering an average of over $160,000 yearly, compared to one for those at the $85,000 range. This followed Trump’s issuance of a legally questionable executive order purportedly requiring employers to remit a $100,000 fee just to apply for these visas. This unfolded alongside the administration’s crackdown on international student visas, with imprecise speech limitations for both student and worker visas and the sudden cancelation of numerous student visas, many citing campus activism or minor legal interactions.

“Due to the delay and inconsistency in how data is released, we likely won’t truly grasp for a year or two how the current climate of political rhetoric and fear affects the demand at the upper levels,” stated Xiao Wang, CEO of Boundless Immigration, a national immigration research and consulting organization. More than 1.1 million international students were registered at American institutions in the previous academic year, although countries like Canada and China are quickly becoming more attractive alternatives.

Ultimately, the pursuit of an American education and the subsequent work visa requires substantial investment — financially, indeed, as international students have limited eligibility for various forms of financial aid and are completely ineligible for federal student loans — but also in terms of time and effort. It involves years of cultural and professional adjustment with the hope of being allowed to utilize their skills in the long run.

“What any investment needs most — and I mean any kind of investment — is confidence and stability regarding what you’re investing in, whether it’s infrastructure, a manufacturing facility, a farm, a career path, or education,” noted Wang.

There was immediate chaos following the signing of the executive order, which had not been previously disclosed by the Department of Homeland Security or the White House; some visa holders abroad feared they might be barred from reentering the country without paying the hefty fee, until the White House quickly clarified this would only pertain to new applicants. Amazon, Google, and Microsoft rushed to alert their employees that they should return to the US without delay. The executive order itself is on tenuous legal footing; immigration laws endow the executive with authority to implement visa fees for processing cost coverage but not to impose arbitrary fees at will. Legal challenges are probable and may well succeed given its lack of legal grounding, though certain federal courts have not halted such administrative actions in the past.

Trump is preparing for additional moves. One prospective change under consideration is shifting student and exchange visas from being valid during the recipient’s time as a student to fixed four-year terms, necessitating reapplication. According to a survey conducted in August and September by the Institute for Progress and NAFSA, the organization representing international student advisers, this would deter enrollment, with half of respondents indicating they would not have chosen to study at US universities if this were the current policy.

“There is no PhD program that spans four years, right? Most undergraduates actually take longer than four years. Thus, you risk facing significant uncertainty midway or toward the end of your academic journey,” remarked Doug Rand, a former senior Homeland Security official (who also co-founded Boundless). Rand highlighted that the recently appointed US Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Joseph Edlow has also mentioned addressing Optional Practical Training (OPT), the work permit granted to recent graduates which often serves as a bridge until they can secure full work visas. “The Trump administration is purposely trying to disrupt every stage of that process. … It’s going to be fascinating to see whether corporate America and tech industries take a stand on that front.”

Thus far, the response from tech and other H-1B-intensive sectors has been conspicuously subdued compared to the backlash witnessed when Trump targeted the visas at the conclusion of his initial term. (In 2020, for instance, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, who himself was an H-1B holder, expressed his “disappointment with the day’s proclamation — we will persist in supporting immigrants and strive to broaden opportunities for everyone”; this time, he has not issued any public remarks.) Rand attributes this partially to tech leaders’ increasingly close ties to Trump and their hesitance given his propensity to target companies that openly oppose him. “We’re likely heading into a time where we won’t see bold press releases declaring this is bad, but rather associations will file lawsuits so that individual companies avoid scrutiny,” he noted.

Restrictive immigration initiatives need not be practically successful to wield a deterrent impact. The salary regulation likewise won’t technically reduce the overall number of H-1B visas available, but it will undoubtedly dissuade employers from pursuing recent graduates who would be heavily disadvantaged in the lottery, thereby stifling the talent pipeline. The prevailing atmosphere of unpredictability and overt hostility from the federal government dissuades engagement on two levels: Potential students and workers are less inclined to navigate the challenges, while potential employers hesitate to risk hiring processes that may be altered by the government at any moment. “[H-1B] is a random lottery. I understand: we place names in a hat, draw them out. That’s the system I agreed to. I comprehend how it functions. I know how many chances I have in the lottery. I know what happens if I don’t win it. Now it’s unclear,” Wang articulated.

This looming uncertainty could have dire long-term impacts on certain industries. An evaluation by the Kaiser Family Foundation suggests that around 500,000 of the country’s 3.2 million registered nurses as of 2022 were immigrants across various statuses, including H-1B holders. In addition, the less-known Conrad 30 scheme permits certain medical graduates to obtain waivers to stay in the nation after graduation to serve in medically underserved regions, a program that has been growing in use over the past twenty years.

The potential decline of medical students, doctors, and nurses holding student, exchange, and work visas would not lead to their immediate replacement with native healthcare workers. The result would be a decrease in available doctors and nurses in the country, especially in areas already facing shortages, particularly as the broader American populace ages and necessitates increased healthcare.

These complications compound — if there are suddenly fewer professionals in the educational and entry-level pipeline for medicine, high-tech manufacturing, or other fields, the consequences will reverberate for years, even if the policies are later reversed. While it may appear exceedingly technical and somewhat esoteric to the general public, these policies will significantly affect the US’s capability to compete with international tech firms and maintain the well-being and health of its people. The H-1B is what Trump identified as a “proper channel” for immigration — yet his administration seems bent on dissolving those avenues as well.

“I don’t believe Stephen Miller can completely shut off the spigot overnight, right? However, if you chip away at enough parts of the system, you can inflict significant damage, and I’m uncertain how much of it can be reversed,” Rand remarked.