A California court has restored automatic work-permit extensions for seven H-4 visa holders, but the ruling does not apply nationwide. More than 100,000 Indian spouses could be affected by the wider H-4 EAD policy.
A US district court has overturned the Trump administration’s move to end automatic extensions of Employment Authorisation Documents (EADs) for H-4 visa holders, providing relief to seven spouses who challenged the policy.
The Central District of California, in an order dated September 10, 2026, granted a preliminary injunction to the seven plaintiffs. The court found that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) had failed to follow the procedure required under the Administrative Procedure Act when it withdrew the automatic-extension mechanism.
However, the ruling is limited to the seven plaintiffs and does not restore automatic H-4 EAD extensions nationwide. Other H-4 visa holders remain subject to the current rules unless they secure separate legal relief or the government changes the policy.
Why the H-4 EAD rule matters for Indians
More than 100,000 Indian spouses, largely women, hold H-4 EADs, which allow eligible spouses of H-1B professionals to work in the US. Under a 2016 rule, eligible applicants could continue working for up to 180 days after their EAD expired while their renewal applications were pending.
US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) temporarily increased that period to 540 days in 2022 and made the longer extension permanent from January 2025, aimed at reducing employment disruptions caused by processing delays.
More from BusinessDHS ended the automatic-extension system through an interim final rule in October 2025. The change raised concerns among H-4 EAD holders because USCIS processing times can exceed the period available for renewing work permits.
Why the US court rejected DHS’s argument
DHS had argued that ending automatic extensions was necessary on national security grounds, saying the system could allow people to continue working before background checks and eligibility reviews were completed.
Judge David O. Carter rejected the government’s emergency justification for bypassing the normal notice-and-comment process. The court found that DHS had not demonstrated the emergency circumstances required to avoid standard rulemaking procedures.
The court also noted that the government already had continuous-vetting mechanisms and had not adequately considered the impact of ending automatic extensions on H-4 EAD holders, their families and employers.
What the ruling means for H-4 visa holders
For the seven plaintiffs, the injunction restores protection from the immediate consequences of the 2025 rule. For other H-4 EAD holders, however, the ruling does not automatically change their status.
Immigration litigation attorney Jonathan Wasden, who represents the plaintiffs, said the ruling could have wider implications for the government’s approach to the policy.
