Dispelling Rumors Regarding H-4 EAD Lawsuit

We at the Murthy Law Firm have recently received a flurry of inquiries regarding a pending lawsuit challenging the legality of the H-4 EAD rule. More specifically, questions have been raised as to whether the Trump Administration is trying to end the H-4 EAD program via the pending lawsuit.

The lawsuit was filed in April 2015 and, as reported in the MurthyDotCom NewsFlash, Lawsuit Filed to Block H-4 EAD Rule, but No Cause for Panic (27.Apr.2015), it seemed like a very weak case. Unsurprisingly, the case was dismissed by a federal district court in September 2016 based on the plaintiff’s lack of legal standing. The court further noted that, even if the case had been decided on its merits, the court likely would have still ruled against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are now in the process of appealing the dismissal based on the lack of standing.

The only action taken by the Trump Administration regarding this pending case was to request a 60-day abeyance – that is, additional time to allow the new Administration “adequate time to consider the issues.” As of yet, the Trump Administration has made no indication that it will try to undo the H-4 EAD rule via this lawsuit. Further, even if the Administration wished to do this, it may prove quite difficult.

There also may be some confusion in the immigrant community related to the unverified and unsigned leaked executive order that touched on the H-4 EAD issue. The lawsuit, however, is unrelated to this proposed order. More details on this unsigned order are available in the MurthyDotCom NewsBrief, Possible Executive Order Targeting Employment-Based Immigration (31.Jan.2017).

In short, there is still no reason to believe this lawsuit will impact the H-4 EAD rule. If any information to the contrary should arise, however, details will be posted on MurthyDotCom.


Copyright © 2017, MURTHY LAW FIRM. All Rights Reserved

Disclaimer: The information provided here is of a general nature and may not apply to any specific or particular circumstance. It is not to be construed as legal advice nor presumed indefinitely up to date.