For audio listeners, you can listen to our audio version of the News Digest here. You can also join our Immigration News Digest Newsletter here.

• DHS Proposes Major New Fees for F-1 OPT
• Lawsuit Challenges Recent USCIS Adjustment and Evidence Policies
• Court Gives DOL Until Year End to Replace H-2A Wage Rule
• Austria Eases Employer Change and Unemployment Rules for Foreign Workers

DHS Proposes Major New Fees for F-1 OPT

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed substantial new fees for F-1 students seeking Optional Practical Training, potentially adding tens of thousands of dollars to the cost of post-graduation work authorization in the United States. 

Under the proposed rule, an SEVP-certified school would be required to pay $70,000 for the first OPT recommendation made for an F-1 student after the rule takes effect and $30,000 for each subsequent recommendation. The proposal would cover pre-completion OPT, post-completion OPT, and STEM OPT. 

The fees would be tied to the sequence of the OPT recommendation rather than the specific type of practical training. For example, if a student’s first recommendation after implementation is for STEM OPT, it would trigger the $70,000 fee. 

Schools would initially be responsible for payment but could pass the cost to the student, OPT employer, or broader student population under the proposal. The fees would be separate from existing USCIS Form I-765 filing fees. They would apply only to OPT recommendations made after the regulation takes effect and would not retroactively affect previously approved OPT. 

DHS says the proposal is intended to strengthen program integrity and deter fraud.  The fees are not currently in effect, and the proposal is subject to a 30-day public comment period before DHS can issue a final rule. 

Impact: If finalized, the proposal could dramatically increase OPT costs and reshape the international student talent pipeline.  Universities and employers should monitor the rulemaking closely and evaluate the potential impact on international student recruitment and early-career hiring.

Lawsuit Challenges Recent USCIS Adjustment and Evidence Policies

A coalition of foreign nationals, unions, and advocacy organizations has filed a federal lawsuit challenging two recent USCIS policies that tightened adjustment of status and other immigration benefit adjudications. The case was filed on October 5 in federal district court in Massachusetts. 

The lawsuit targets two policies currently in effect. 

The first, issued in May, changed how USCIS exercises discretion in adjustment of status cases. The policy emphasizes consular processing abroad as the standard pathway to permanent residence and permits officers to consider an applicant’s decision to pursue adjustment inside the United States as part of the discretionary analysis. 

The second policy expanded USCIS officers’ authority to deny immigration benefit requests without first issuing a Request for Evidence or Notice of Intent to Deny. Under that guidance, officers may deny cases when required initial evidence is missing or the filing otherwise fails to establish eligibility without first providing an opportunity to supplement the record. 

The plaintiffs argue that both policies violate the Administrative Procedure Act and federal immigration law, including by exceeding USCIS’s statutory authority and implementing significant policy changes without required notice-and-comment procedures. They also argue that applying the policies to already pending cases creates due process concerns. 

The coalition is seeking preliminary relief blocking enforcement while the litigation proceeds and ultimately asking the court to vacate the policies.

Impact: For now, both challenged USCIS policies remain in effect. Employers and adjustment applicants should continue preparing filings under the current standards, including submitting complete evidence from the outset, while monitoring the lawsuit for potential changes to adjustment adjudications and RFE practices.

Court Gives DOL Until Year End to Replace H-2A Wage Rule

A federal court in California has ordered the Department of Labor to develop a new wage methodology for H-2A agricultural workers by the end of 2026, following an earlier ruling that found the Department’s current Adverse Effect Wage Rate (AEWRs) methodology unlawful. 

The dispute involves DOL’s 2025 interim final rule establishing how minimum wages are calculated for H-2A workers in non-range agricultural occupations. The rule uses Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics data to establish applicable AEWRs. 

Although the court found the methodology unlawful, it allowed existing wage rates to remain in effect while DOL develops a replacement. After DOL requested additional time, the court set a year-end deadline for a new methodology. 

For now, employers must continue complying with the existing AEWRs until DOL publishes replacement rates. DOL has also warned that employers could face future back wage adjustments if replacement rates exceed amounts paid during the transition period, although no backpay obligation currently applies. 

DOL recommends that affected employers maintain accurate worker and payroll records during this period in case retroactive wage adjustments are later required.  

Impact: Agricultural employers face continued uncertainty as DOL develops a replacement H-2A wage methodology. Employers should continue paying current required rates while maintaining detailed payroll and worker records in case future wage adjustments apply to work performed during the transition.

Austria Eases Employer Change and Unemployment Rules for Foreign Workers

Austria has implemented immigration reforms providing greater flexibility for certain foreign workers changing employers or experiencing unemployment. The changes took effect August 7, 2026 and form part of Austria’s implementation of the revised EU Single Permit Directive. 

Under the new framework, holders of qualifying employer-specific residence permits may change employers after receiving government approval. If authorities do not decide the application within 45 days, eligible workers may provisionally begin employment with the new employer, subject to applicable requirements. 

Austria has also expanded protections following job loss. Certain foreign workers, including holders of Red-White-Red Cards and EU Blue Cards, generally have at least six months to find new employment before authorities are notified that the conditions underlying their work authorization are no longer satisfied. In certain circumstances, this period may be extended by three months. 

The reforms also seek to accelerate immigration processing, with many complete residence applications subject to a 90-day adjudication period. Existing shorter processing requirements for categories such as Red-White-Red Cards and EU Blue Cards remain applicable. 

The changes are intended to provide greater mobility for foreign workers while bringing Austria’s immigration framework into alignment with updated EU requirements. 

Impact: The reforms provide employers and foreign workers with greater flexibility during workforce transitions and may reduce disruptions caused by job changes or unemployment. Employers should confirm permit-specific requirements, as the protections do not apply uniformly across all immigration categories.