The September 11 ruling found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had failed to justify bypassing the standard public notice-and-comment process before introducing the change. A federal judge in California has granted limited relief to seven plaintiffs challenging a Trump administration rule that ended automatic extensions of work permits for immigrants awaiting renewal decisions.
The decision offers a narrow reprieve for affected workers but does not restore automatic work permit extensions for all immigrants. The ruling applies only to the seven plaintiffs in the lawsuit, while the administration moves closer to formalizing the restrictions through a final rule.
A disruption to a spouse’s employment can affect household income and career continuity while an application remains pending. The administration’s wider effort to end automatic work permit extensions remains underway. That approval marks a step in the regulatory process but does not, by itself, establish that the final rule has taken effect.
The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs approved a final DHS rule on September 9, according to Bloomberg Law. Because indian nationals make up a substantial share of H-1B workers in the US, for Indian families, the issue is significant.
The case is particularly relevant to eligible spouses of H-1B visa holders, who may hold H-4 dependent status and qualify for employment authorization under specific conditions. Carter, of the Central District of California , ruled that DHS had not established sufficient grounds to skip the usual rulemaking process when it issued the interim final rule in October 2025. The change took effect at the end of October 2025. Eligible H-4 spouses of H-1B workers can apply for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) if they meet specific eligibility requirements. The ruling does not automatically restore extensions for every H-4 spouse or other immigrant worker affected by the policy. Department of Homeland Security, was filed in the US District Court for the Central District of California under case number 8:26-cv-00060.
US District Judge David O. The department cited national security and public safety concerns to justify ending automatic extensions for immigrants with pending work permit renewal applications. However, Carter questioned whether ending work authorization extensions would address the security concerns raised by the government. “The IFR does nothing to eliminate the former concern. The plaintiffs argued that DHS had failed to establish the legal basis required to bypass notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act. Under the DHS rule, workers could no longer rely on the previous automatic extension mechanism when their existing work permits expired while renewal applications were pending. This can leave affected workers facing a gap in employment authorization, potentially forcing them to stop working until their renewals are approved. Its immediate protection is limited to the seven plaintiffs in the case. The lawsuit, Jane Doe v. For affected H-1B spouses, the ruling provides limited relief rather than a nationwide reversal of the restrictions.
“If an EAD applicant is a national security threat, the issue is that they are able to live in the United States, not that they are able to work in the United States,” Carter wrote, according to Bloomberg Law.
