The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has moved quickly to advance a legal challenge to President Donald Trump’s $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa petitions, setting an accelerated briefing schedule ahead of the next annual visa lottery.

In an order issued Monday, the court directed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities to file their opening brief by Jan. 9, with the Trump administration’s response due by Jan. 30. The case challenges a lower court ruling that upheld the fee as a lawful exercise of presidential authority.

The expedited schedule follows an emergency request from the Chamber and the AAU, which argued that the appeal raises serious legal questions and that timing is critical with the H-1B registration process set to begin in March 2026.

The groups contend that the Immigration and Nationality Act does not give the president the power to impose what they describe as a massive tax on U.S. employers.

“Neither provision cited by the proclamation contains the clear statement necessary to delegate Congress’s taxing authority to the president,” the organizations told the court, adding that the measure “takes a wrecking ball” to the statutory design of the H-1B program.

The H-1B visa allows U.S. employers to hire highly skilled foreign workers in specialty occupations, including technology, engineering and scientific research roles. Trump announced the $100,000 fee in September, framing it as a necessary restriction on entry to address what he described as widespread abuse of the program and the displacement of U.S. workers.

The Chamber filed suit in October, arguing that the proclamation exceeds presidential authority and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. The AAU later joined the case, representing major research universities that rely heavily on foreign talent.

Just days before Christmas, U.S. District Judge Beryl A. Howell ruled in favor of the administration, finding that Trump acted under an “express statutory grant of authority” and that the proclamation was not unlawful.

In asking the appeals court to intervene quickly, the Chamber and the AAU warned that the fee is already disrupting hiring plans across multiple sectors.

“Absent prompt relief, employers unable to pay the proclamation fee will miss their chance to register for the March lottery and be forced to forgo H-1B hiring until at least next year,” the groups said.

They added that the cost is so high that many companies subject to the annual 85,000-visa cap have scaled back or abandoned H-1B recruitment altogether. Universities and nonprofit healthcare providers, which are exempt from the cap, also report delays in filling teaching, research and clinical positions.

“Candidly, it already is too late to spare cap-exempt employers from all the harms of the proclamation,” the groups said, though they argued a ruling by March could still help universities and employers plan for later hiring cycles.

The case is one of several lawsuits challenging the visa fee. Other suits brought by labor groups, healthcare organizations, religious institutions and a coalition of states argue that the measure conflicts with Congress’s intent and improperly raises revenue without legislative approval.

A three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit will hear the appeal. Judges Patricia A. Millett, Florence Y. Pan and Bradley N. Garcia are assigned to the case.