A group of Indian H-4 spouses sue Trump admin over scrapping of auto extension of work permits

A group of Indian-origin H-4 visa holders have filed a lawsuit in a US district court challenging the Trump administration’s decision to end automatic extensions of employment authorisation documents (EADs), arguing that the move is arbitrary, unlawful, and will force thousands of legally employed immigrants out of their jobs.

The complaint, filed on Jan 8, in the central district court of California, seeks nationwide relief against an interim final rule issued by US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in Oct 2025, that ended the auto-extension mechanism for EADs.




These seven H-4 visa holders, all spouses of H-1B professionals with approved green card applications, contend that the abrupt removal of automatic EAD extensions, without public consultation, will result in widespread job losses due to chronic processing delays at the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). A few of these plaintiffs have lost their employment authorisation or are on the verge of being forced out of work, despite having filed timely renewal applications.

The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Justin Tseng and Jonathan D. Wasden, who in the lawsuit argue that USCIS itself had acknowledged severe processing delays in the past and had introduced ‘extended’ EAD auto-extensions in 2022 after settling class-action litigation.

A 2016 rule provided for automatic extension of up to 180 days from the date of expiry of the EAD, this meant that the spouse could continue to work pending processing of the EAD renewal application. In spring 2022, USCIS temporarily increased the automatic extension to 540 days. Later with effect from Jan 2025, this extended period was made permanent, to prevent any job disruptions caused by processing delays. A few months later, in Oct, via an interim final rule, the automatic extension mechanism was abruptly terminated.

The plaintiffs say the Trump administration’s decision to now roll back that protection revives the very disruption the earlier rule was meant to address.

The lawsuit explains that H-4 spouses can file EAD renewal applications only within 180 days before their current work permit expires, and that this timing is often outside their control. Because an H-4 spouse’s status extension must be filed along with the H-1B worker’s extension, any delay by the employer in filing the H-1B petition automatically shortens the window available to the dependent spouse.

The plaintiffs contend that even when applications are filed as early as the rules allow, USCIS processing delays routinely exceed 180 days, making job loss inevitable if automatic extensions are not available. TOI has pointed out earlier that the interim final rule could adversely impact as many as one lakh Indian spouses (largely women) who hold EADs.

The Trump administration has justified the rollback on national security and public safety grounds, citing the need for additional vetting before extending work authorisation. However, the complaint calls this rationale a ‘pretext’, arguing that DHS already operates continuous vetting systems that monitor immigrants in real time and that the government has failed to establish any causal link between EAD auto-extensions and security threats.

In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs have requested the court to strike down the interim rule, restore the EAD auto-extension framework, and prevent DHS from enforcing across the country the withdrawal of the automatic extension mechanism.