US court restores automatic H-4 EAD extensions for seven spouses; relief limited

A US district court has set aside an interim final rule issued by the Trump administration in October 2025 that ended automatic extensions of Employment Authorisation Documents (EADs), but the relief is limited to seven H-4 visa holders who challenged the rule and does not apply nationwide, reported Times of India.

The Central District of California, in an order dated September 10, 2026, granted a preliminary injunction to the seven plaintiffs and found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had not followed the procedure required under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when it withdrew the automatic-extension mechanism.

Also Read: Trump administration’s $100,000 OPT fee proposal clears White House review: What Indian students need to know


The ruling is significant for H-4 EAD holders, many of whom are spouses of H-1B professionals with approved green card applications. However, other H-4 visa holders will not automatically receive the benefit of the order and may have to seek separate legal relief.

Why the H-4 EAD rule matters

More than 100,000 Indian spouses, largely women, hold H-4 EADs. Under a 2016 rule, eligible applicants could continue working for up to 180 days after their EAD expired while their renewal applications were pending. USCIS temporarily increased this period to 540 days in 2022 and made the longer extension permanent from January 2025 to reduce employment disruptions caused by processing delays.

Also Read: Canada's Express Entry to get new digital platform with Expression of Interest system: What Indian applicats need to know

DHS ended the automatic-extension system through an interim final rule in October 2025. The move raised concerns among H-4 EAD holders because USCIS processing times can exceed the period available for renewing work permits.

The plaintiffs argued that H-4 spouses can apply for EAD renewal only within 180 days of the expiry of their existing permits. Their renewal window can also be affected if the H-1B worker's employer delays filing the worker's status extension, which generally has to be filed alongside the H-4 extension.

Why the court rejected the DHS argument

The court rejected the government's justification for bypassing the usual notice-and-comment process. DHS had cited national security concerns, arguing that automatic extensions could allow people to keep working before background checks and eligibility reviews were completed.

Judge David O. Carter found that DHS had not shown the emergency circumstances needed to avoid the normal rulemaking process. The court also noted that the government already had continuous-vetting mechanisms and had not adequately considered the impact of the rule on H-4 EAD holders, their families and employers.

Jonathan Wasden, the immigration litigation attorney representing the plaintiffs, said, "This means that the final rule the government has been hinting at in recent months is dead on arrival."

The injunction, however, does not have nationwide effect. H-4 EAD holders outside the seven-plaintiff group therefore remain subject to the current rules unless they obtain separate relief or the government changes the policy.

(With inputs from TOI)