Summary

• The Supreme Court of the United States declined to grant review in Save Jobs USA v. DHS (No. 24-923) on October 14, 2025, effectively concluding a protracted legal challenge to the rule that allows certain H-4 visa holders to obtain employment authorization.
• Because certiorari was denied, the prior rulings of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit — which held that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had statutory authority to issue the H-4 employment authorization rule — remain in force.
• The case challenged the 2015 H-4 employment authorization Document (EAD) rule, arguing DHS lacked authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and that the rule harmed U.S. workers.
• The outcome maintains the status-quo for H-4 visa holders currently authorized to work in the U.S., and signals finality for the legal challenge at this time.

Introduction

The Supreme Court’s decision to deny review in Save Jobs USA v. DHS marks the end of a nearly decade-long legal challenge to the 2015 DHS rule granting employment authorization to certain H-4 visa holders — spouses of H-1B non-immigrant workers. With the denial of certiorari, the existing legal framework remains unchanged: eligible H-4 visa holders may continue to apply for work authorization, and DHS’s regulatory authority to issue the rule is upheld, barring further successful legal challenge.

Background

The Save Jobs USA v. The Department of Homeland Security case stemmed from a 2015 DHS regulation granting certain H-4 visa holders eligibility for employment authorization if their H-1B spouse was in the process of obtaining permanent residency. The plaintiffs, Save Jobs USA, an organization of U.S. technology workers, argued that DHS exceeded its authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) and that the rule increased labor competition. Federal courts rejected those claims, finding DHS acted within its statutory authority. The Supreme Court’s October 2025 denial of review leaves those lower court rulings intact.

H-4 and H-1B Visa Categories

The H-1B visa is a non-immigrant classification permitting U.S. employers to hire foreign workers in specialty occupations requiring at least a bachelor’s degree. H-4 visas are dependents (spouses and children) of H-1B visa holders. The 2015 DHS rule allowed certain H-4 spouses — namely, those whose H-1B spouses are on a lawful permanent residency track — to apply for Employment Authorization Documents (EADs).

Legal Challenge: Save Jobs USA

Save Jobs USA, an association of U.S. tech-workers, challenged the 2015 rule on multiple grounds: that DHS lacked statutory authority under the INA, that the rule expanded employment rights to a visa class not authorized by Congress, and that it harmed American workers by increasing job competition. The case proceeded through the District Court, the D.C. Circuit, and finally to petitioning the Supreme Court.

Precedent and Statutory Authority

The D.C. Circuit, relying on precedent such as Washington Alliance of Technology Workers v. DHS (WashTech), held that DHS’s authority under 8 U.S.C. § 1184(a)(1) to prescribe the terms of non-immigrant admission includes authority to issue employment-authorization rules for certain visa classes. Because certiorari was denied, this reading remains binding.

Legal Authority Confirmed

The denial of review means the lower court’s interpretation that DHS has statutory authority to allow certain H-4 visa holders to work remains intact.

Status Quo Preserved

Eligible H-4 visa holders retain the ability to apply for employment authorization, and employers relying on H-4 EADs may continue operations without disruption.

Future Outlook

The current Trump administration has taken a markedly restrictive stance toward legal immigration, favoring policies that prioritize U.S. workers under its “America First” framework. While the Supreme Court’s denial of review temporarily solidifies work authorization for H-4 spouses, it remains uncertain how long this stability will last. Given the administration’s broader efforts to tighten immigration pathways, it would not be surprising if future actions sought to roll back or further limit the H-4 EAD rule as part of a continued push to reshape employment-based immigration in favor of domestic labor interests.