A federal lawsuit has been filed against the Trump administration over its controversial "Gold Card" visa programme, which lawyers argue creates an illegal "fast lane" for wealthy foreigners at the expense of qualified immigrants who have followed established procedures. The legal challenge, supported by noncitizen doctors and researchers, claims the scheme unlawfully rearranges America's immigration system to prioritise financial resources over merit.
Pay-to-Play Scheme Under Legal Scrutiny
The lawsuit specifically targets President Trump's creation of a pay-to-play arrangement that grants EB-1 and EB-2 visas with what the administration describes as a "gift" of at least $1 million, regardless of the applicant's qualifications or professional achievements. These employment-based visas are traditionally reserved for foreign workers demonstrating "extraordinary ability" and "outstanding" contributions in fields including medicine, arts, and sciences.
According to the legal filing, Congress has established specific caps on the number of EB-1 and EB-2 visas that can be issued annually, with requirements that they be allocated in the order applications were received. The Gold Card programme allegedly violates these statutory provisions by converting visas into what critics describe as an illegal revenue-generating scheme that disadvantages immigrants whose admission pathways are established by law.
"Playground for the Highest Bidder"
Norm Eisen, co-founder of Democracy Defenders Fund which is supporting the litigation, offered a stark assessment of the programme's implications. "Forget 'give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses,'" Eisen stated. "Donald Trump's maxim is 'give us your money, your oligarchs and your privileged few' when it comes to his Gold Card program that is illegal."
Eisen further argued that the president's initiative "is trying to turn our immigration system into a playground for the highest bidder and push aside the scientists, engineers, innovators, and others who can improve and enrich all our lives."
Programme Details and Financial Requirements
According to President Trump's September executive order establishing the scheme, the "gold card" visa requires individual applicants to pay $1 million, while businesses sponsoring employees must pay $2 million. Additional financial obligations include:
- An annual maintenance fee of $20,000 for sponsoring companies
- A 5 percent transfer fee each time a visa is switched from one employee to another
- Plans for a $5 million "platinum" card offering 270 days in the United States without being subject to U.S. taxes on non-U.S. income
The administration considers possession of $1 million as demonstrating "exceptional business ability" for employment-based visa purposes. Notably, the application process does not stipulate that funds must originate from the applicant's own business or employment, nor does it prevent applicants from using money from family members, loans, or even cryptocurrency to pay the required fees.
Plaintiffs and Broader Implications
Plaintiffs in the lawsuit include the American Association of University Professors alongside several award-winning biomedical engineers, cancer researchers, public health workers, and other medical and scientific professionals from Mexico, Colombia, Ghana, and Taiwan. These individuals are seeking lawful residence to work in the United States through the established EB-1 and EB-2 programmes.
Sarah Wilson, partner with Colombo & Hurd among the firms representing the plaintiffs, explained the legal argument against the programme. "Congress created a clear, merit-based framework for employment-based immigration, with strict limits on who qualifies and how visas are allocated," Wilson stated. "The Gold Card program attempts to bypass that system by treating wealth as a substitute for statutory eligibility and, in doing so, it harms the scientists, researchers and professionals who have played by the rules and waited their turn."
Contradictions in Immigration Policy
The lawsuit emerges against a backdrop of significant immigration policy shifts under the Trump administration. While Homeland Security has been mandated to remove more than 1 million immigrants annually, stripping legal status from hundreds of thousands, and the Department of Justice has restructured immigration courts to expedite removals, the administration simultaneously promotes what the president describes as "a direct path to citizenship" through the Gold Card programme.
This contradiction is further highlighted by the administration's severe restrictions on foreigners from dozens of countries entering the United States, even as it rolls out a programme requiring substantial financial investment from applicants.
Practical Limitations and Waiting Times
Despite President Trump's promotion of the Gold Card as a pathway to citizenship, the programme's website clarifies that it only confers legal residency. All applicants must still qualify for lawful permanent resident status, with visas subject to availability. Several countries face significant wait times of a year or longer based on visa availability, and the president has indefinitely suspended visa applications from dozens of nations.
Immigrants applying for lawful permanent status through traditional green card pathways currently face wait times exceeding three years, with many individuals locked in years-long legal battles in immigration courts while continuing to pay taxes through their employment. The Gold Card programme's impact on these established processes remains a central concern for critics and legal challengers alike.
