Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones joined 22 attorneys general in a comment letter opposing a proposed USCIS rule that would impose a $103,265 tax on certain H-1B petitions. The coalition urged USCIS to withdraw the proposal, arguing it exceeds the agency’s authority, harms state staffing, and violates rulemaking requirements.
This is not a privacy enforcement action, but employers should review vendor and customer agreements covering recruiting, staffing, and H-1B sponsorship. Check clauses allocating immigration petition costs and government fees, reimbursement or pass-through charges, responsibility for filings by staffing subcontractors, and change-in-law mechanisms in case the proposed fee or related requirements change. Employee offer and immigration-support documents should also clearly state which party is responsible for sponsorship and associated costs.
Entity
U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Industry
Other"U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)"
"Published on:** September 25, 2026"
"would impose a tax of $103,265 on non-cap-exempt employers"
"under the Immigration and Nationality Act"
"violates the Administrative Procedure Act"
"The proposed rule exceeds USCIS’s legal authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act."
A federal judge permanently blocked the Trump administration from penalizing states over SNAP administration and struck down guidance restricting food assistance for certain lawful permanent residents. The release does not state the date of the court’s ruling, so the event date uses the publication date as a proxy.
Attorney General Jay Jones joined a coalition of 24 attorneys general in filing a comment letter opposing a proposed CMS rule that the coalition says oversteps federal law, could put Medicaid funding at risk, and interfere with state regulation of health insurance. The coalition urges CMS to withdraw or significantly revise the proposed rule.
Attorney General Jay Jones and a coalition of 24 attorneys general obtained a preliminary injunction blocking the Trump administration from demanding a database of state-owned records containing personal information of 17 million CDL drivers from AAMVA and from terminating over $10 million in federal funding. The lawsuits allege DOT, FMCSA, and DHS violated federal privacy laws by secretly creating a database with no guardrails on use or sharing of Social Security numbers and no public notice.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones announced that Governor Spanberger's declaration of a state of emergency due to prolonged, severe drought has triggered Virginia's anti-price gouging statutes, making it unlawful to charge unconscionable prices for necessary goods and services. A price is unconscionable if it grossly exceeds the price charged during the ten days immediately prior to the emergency. No entity was charged or fined; the release is a consumer advisory explaining how to report suspected price gouging to the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Section.
$694.0M
Virginia and 40 other state attorneys general settled with subprime auto lender Credit Acceptance Corporation (CAC) for $694 million in cash restitution and debt relief. The settlement resolves allegations that CAC originated loans it knew or should have known consumers could not afford, and that it encouraged and failed to prevent dealers from unlawfully 'packing' auto-loan contracts with unwanted Vehicle Service Contracts and GAP products. The Consent Judgment was filed September 17, 2026, with the City of Richmond Circuit Court.
Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones, joined by a bipartisan coalition of 48 other attorneys general, sent a letter urging the FCC to strengthen its 'Know Your Upstream Provider' (KYUP) rules to keep illegal robocalls off the U.S. phone network. The coalition asks the FCC to mandate baseline vetting measures for upstream providers, add monitoring triggers, strengthen STIR/SHAKEN caller ID authentication, establish base penalties, and require retention of KYUP data. No company was fined in this action; it is regulatory advocacy that builds on the Anti-Robocall Multistate Litigation Task Force's Operation Robocall Roundup, which sent warning letters to 37 voice providers.