In August this year, the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) added a rule to its regulatory agenda, titled "Removing H-4 Dependent Spouses From the Classes of Noncitizens Eligible for Employment Authorisation". If finalised, it would end the ability of H-1B spouses (or H-4 visa holders) to work in the US, reversing a policy in place since 2015.
This article explains what the rule would do, why the administration is pursuing it, the main arguments on each side, and the legal questions courts would likely examine if the rule is challenged.
US Proposes To End H-4 Work Permits: Why Indian Spouses Would be Most Impacted
1. Impact of the Proposed Rule Change
Under the 2015 rule, an H-4 spouse could apply for an Employment Authorisation Document if the H-1B spouse had an approved I-140 immigrant petition or had received H-1B time beyond the six-year limit.
Just for reference, an I-140 is an immigrant petition filed by an employer to sponsor a foreign worker for a permanent employment-based green card in the US.
The new proposed rule would remove H-4 spouses from the list of people eligible for a work permit and return to DHS's pre-2015 practice.
The DHS has not set a target date for the new rule to come into force. The proposal must go through notice-and-comment rulemaking before it can take effect. Existing Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) remain valid until they expire unless a final rule provides otherwise.
The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approved roughly 228,000 initial and renewal H-4 EADs between FY2023 and FY2025. Research based on census data indicates nearly 90 percent of H-4 spouses hold a bachelor's degree, and over half hold a graduate degree. Most affected families are Indian nationals waiting in the employment-based green card backlog.
The regulatory summary describes the change as restoring DHS's long-standing practice of not extending work authorisation to H-4 spouses. The Immigration and Nationality Act does not mention H-4 work permits; the 2015 rule rested on DHS's general authority to define eligible classes. The administration's view is that a benefit created by regulation can be withdrawn by regulation.
The rule also fits a broader policy direction. This year the administration has proposed a $103,265 fee on cap-subject H-1B petitions, announced a rewrite of prevailing wage levels, and ended automatic EAD extensions for new applications. The underlying theory is that reducing the number of foreign workers creates opportunities for US workers.
Expand2. What Critics Say
Critics have raised three important points of apprehension regarding the proposed rule change
Economic evidence
Since January 2025 the foreign-born workforce has fallen by about 1.8 million, while unemployment among US-born workers rose from 4.3 to 4.6 percent. H-4 spouses work mainly in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) and professional fields where unemployment is low. Earlier survey research found that ending H-4 work authorisation would reduce tax revenue and economic activity, with little evidence that US workers would fill the vacated jobs.
Family and employer reliance
Over the last 10 years, H-4 spouses have bought homes, started businesses, taken loans, and had children on the strength of their work permits. Employers have hired and trained them. A 2019 survey found that nearly seven in eight H-4 EAD families had made at least one major life decision based on the permit.
The backlog
When DHS first attempted a rescission in 2019, the rule was sent for review and never finalised. Since then, the Indian EB-2 (second-preference employment-based green card category) wait has grown to the point where a green card is effectively a lifetime away. Opponents argue that removing a spouse's ability to work during a wait of that length imposes a hardship far greater than in 2019.
Expand3. Judicial Scrutiny of the Proposal
If the rule is finalised, a court challenge is widely expected. Three questions would likely decide the outcome.
Does the agency have the authority?
The DC Circuit confirmed in 2023 that DHS had authority to create the H-4 EAD. The same authority generally allows DHS to remove it. Authority alone is unlikely to be the deciding issue.
Is the reasoning adequate?
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency may change policy but must give a reasoned explanation and address the facts that supported the earlier rule. A rule that does not do so can be set aside as arbitrary and capricious.
Were reliance interests considered?
In DHS v. Regents of the University of California (2020), the Supreme Court held that the administration could end DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) but had acted unlawfully by failing to weigh the reliance interests of recipients. Whether DHS addresses the reliance built up by H-4 families and employers over a decade is likely to be the central question in any litigation.
Expand4. What Happens Next?
The most likely sequence is a proposed rule, a public comment period, a final rule, and then a court challenge with a request to pause enforcement. Each stage takes months. The reasoning DHS provides in the proposed rule and the comments submitted in response will form the record a court review.
For H-4 EAD holders, the practical steps are the same regardless of how the rule turns out: renew early given processing times now exceeding a year with no automatic extension, submit comments once the rule is published, explore independent options such as a spouse's own H-1B or an EB-1 or EB-2 petition, and plan on the assumption that court relief, if it comes, may not arrive before an EAD expires.
The rule is a proposal at this stage. Its fate will depend on the reasoning DHS provides when it publishes the full text and on how the courts treat the reliance built up over 10 years.
(Sai Srinivas Reddy Bhumireddy is an Attorney at Law, licensed in the State of Indiana, US, practicing in Immigration Law, Family Law, and Personal Injury. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed are the author's own. The Quint does not endorse or is responsible for them.)
Expand
Impact of the Proposed Rule Change
Under the 2015 rule, an H-4 spouse could apply for an Employment Authorisation Document if the H-1B spouse had an approved I-140 immigrant petition or had received H-1B time beyond the six-year limit.
Just for reference, an I-140 is an immigrant petition filed by an employer to sponsor a foreign worker for a permanent employment-based green card in the US.
The new proposed rule would remove H-4 spouses from the list of people eligible for a work permit and return to DHS's pre-2015 practice.
The DHS has not set a target date for the new rule to come into force. The proposal must go through notice-and-comment rulemaking before it can take effect. Existing Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) remain valid until they expire unless a final rule provides otherwise.
The US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approved roughly 228,000 initial and renewal H-4 EADs between FY2023 and FY2025. Research based on census data indicates nearly 90 percent of H-4 spouses hold a bachelor's degree, and over half hold a graduate degree. Most affected families are Indian nationals waiting in the employment-based green card backlog.
The regulatory summary describes the change as restoring DHS's long-standing practice of not extending work authorisation to H-4 spouses. The Immigration and Nationality Act does not mention H-4 work permits; the 2015 rule rested on DHS's general authority to define eligible classes. The administration's view is that a benefit created by regulation can be withdrawn by regulation.
The rule also fits a broader policy direction. This year the administration has proposed a $103,265 fee on cap-subject H-1B petitions, announced a rewrite of prevailing wage levels, and ended automatic EAD extensions for new applications. The underlying theory is that reducing the number of foreign workers creates opportunities for US workers.
What Critics Say
Critics have raised three important points of apprehension regarding the proposed rule change
Economic evidence
Since January 2025 the foreign-born workforce has fallen by about 1.8 million, while unemployment among US-born workers rose from 4.3 to 4.6 percent. H-4 spouses work mainly in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) and professional fields where unemployment is low. Earlier survey research found that ending H-4 work authorisation would reduce tax revenue and economic activity, with little evidence that US workers would fill the vacated jobs.
Family and employer reliance
Over the last 10 years, H-4 spouses have bought homes, started businesses, taken loans, and had children on the strength of their work permits. Employers have hired and trained them. A 2019 survey found that nearly seven in eight H-4 EAD families had made at least one major life decision based on the permit.
The backlog
When DHS first attempted a rescission in 2019, the rule was sent for review and never finalised. Since then, the Indian EB-2 (second-preference employment-based green card category) wait has grown to the point where a green card is effectively a lifetime away. Opponents argue that removing a spouse's ability to work during a wait of that length imposes a hardship far greater than in 2019.
Judicial Scrutiny of the Proposal
If the rule is finalised, a court challenge is widely expected. Three questions would likely decide the outcome.
Does the agency have the authority?
The DC Circuit confirmed in 2023 that DHS had authority to create the H-4 EAD. The same authority generally allows DHS to remove it. Authority alone is unlikely to be the deciding issue.
Is the reasoning adequate?
Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency may change policy but must give a reasoned explanation and address the facts that supported the earlier rule. A rule that does not do so can be set aside as arbitrary and capricious.
Were reliance interests considered?
In DHS v. Regents of the University of California (2020), the Supreme Court held that the administration could end DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) but had acted unlawfully by failing to weigh the reliance interests of recipients. Whether DHS addresses the reliance built up by H-4 families and employers over a decade is likely to be the central question in any litigation.
What Happens Next?
The most likely sequence is a proposed rule, a public comment period, a final rule, and then a court challenge with a request to pause enforcement. Each stage takes months. The reasoning DHS provides in the proposed rule and the comments submitted in response will form the record a court review.
For H-4 EAD holders, the practical steps are the same regardless of how the rule turns out: renew early given processing times now exceeding a year with no automatic extension, submit comments once the rule is published, explore independent options such as a spouse's own H-1B or an EB-1 or EB-2 petition, and plan on the assumption that court relief, if it comes, may not arrive before an EAD expires.
The rule is a proposal at this stage. Its fate will depend on the reasoning DHS provides when it publishes the full text and on how the courts treat the reliance built up over 10 years.
(Sai Srinivas Reddy Bhumireddy is an Attorney at Law, licensed in the State of Indiana, US, practicing in Immigration Law, Family Law, and Personal Injury. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed are the author's own. The Quint does not endorse or is responsible for them.)