Federal Visa Crackdown Finally Hits Arizona State University and Expands Beyond Tech…

Are Decades of American-born Student Discrimination Getting Addressed? Could Visa Fraud Accountability Be Coming?

When does the American-born worker get First Consideration? That was the question I raised in my earlier reporting on foreign-worker visa programs. On October 8, 2026, the Trump administration announced actions that brought that question directly to Arizona State University, which was ranked the nation’s most innovative university by U.S. News & World Report.

Vice President JD Vance and Department of Labor Inspector General Anthony D’Esposito announced two related actions in a White House press conference: the suspension of the Permanent Labor Certification (PERM) program for eight major employers, and a new federal investigation into nine universities — including Arizona State University — over their alleged misuse of J-1 visas for federally funded research positions.

Inspector General Anthony D’Esposito said subpoenas had been served and investigations were underway. Officials are examining whether universities used those classifications to undercut American researchers’ wages, avoid employment obligations, or improperly use taxpayer-funded research programs.

At the same press conference, Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling announced the suspension of eight major employers, including Microsoft and Adobe, from the PERM program — a required step in many employer-sponsored green-card cases.

The announcements mark the most aggressive Federal intervention yet into the Temporary-VISA and Green-card pathways that have long supplied Foreign-born talent to both private industry and academic research.

These are separate actions involving different programs. But together, they put employers’ hiring practices under federal scrutiny and raise a question Arizona families deserve to have answered: Are qualified American-born graduates and researchers receiving a Fair Opportunity & First Consideration to compete for the work their education prepared them to do?

ASU says its hiring complies with federal policy and law. The investigation must now examine the records behind that assurance—how positions are advertised, how applicants are evaluated, and how compensation compares for equivalent work.

The University Probe: ASU Named Among Nine

Vance stated that nine institutions — Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Brown, the University of Pittsburgh, UC Davis, Caltech, Arizona State University, and MIT — are using J-1 visas for roughly 61 percent of federally funded research positions, compared with a national average of about 38 percent. He argued the disparity allows universities to undercut wages for American graduate students and researchers by approximately $20,000 per year.

“Something weird is going on at these universities,” Vance said. “They’re using these visas way too much.”

“They’re using them to undercut the wages of American grad students and American researchers, and it simply has to stop.”

(Vice President JD Vance, alleging misuse of J-1 VISAs)

D’Esposito confirmed that subpoenas have already been served and investigations are underway. He framed the inquiry around whether universities have improperly used J-1 classifications “to avoid employment obligations, exploit taxpayer-funded programs, and undermine American workers,” and whether foreign influence or financial ties are compromising federally funded research.

Arizona State University responded in a statement:

“As one of the largest research universities in the United States, Arizona State University educates more STEM majors than any other university and employs one of the largest technical and scientific workforces in the country. This benefits both the Arizona and the United States economies and in doing so, ASU has hired the talent needed to perform these functions and done so in complete compliance with existing United States policy and law.”

Other schools issued similar statements asserting compliance and cooperation. The administration has not released the underlying data supporting the 61 percent / 38 percent figures, nor has it published institution-specific breakdowns for ASU.

The PERM Suspensions: Microsoft, Adobe, and Six Outsourcing Firms

Separately, Labor Secretary Keith Sonderling announced that the Department of Labor will no longer accept or process new or pending PERM applications for Microsoft, Adobe, Cognizant, Infosys, Tata Consultancy Services, Wipro, HCL Technologies, and Capgemini.

PERM is a required labor-certification step in many employer-sponsored green-card cases. Employers must attest, under penalty of perjury, that they tested the U.S. labor market and found no qualified, willing, able and available U.S. workers for the position.

Sonderling said that since 2009 these eight companies alone requested nearly three million foreign workers, received more than 230,000 H-1B approvals, and obtained more than 100,000 permanent labor certifications. Vance singled out Microsoft, stating the company laid off roughly 6,000 American workers in 2025 while benefiting from approximately 6,300 H-1B visas and nearly 3,000 green-card certifications.

Microsoft responded that the vast majority of its U.S. employees are Americans and that approximately 80 percent of its H-1B applications in the most recent fiscal year were for existing employees seeking extensions or status changes. The company said it files only for workers who meet the rigorous standards of the visa category and pays among the highest wages in the H-1B program.

The Response Extends Beyond Washington

The suspensions have also drawn objections from India. On October 9, India’s Ministry of External Affairs criticized the action and Vance’s description of foreign workers, emphasizing Indian professionals’ contributions to American innovation and economic growth.

The stakes are substantial. USCIS reports that approximately 70 percent of approved H-1B petitions in fiscal year 2025 involved beneficiaries born in India. These are petition approvals, including continuing employment — not a count of newly arriving workers. And this represents a significant source for India’s U.S. remittances back to India and subsidizing its economy – Indians remit approximately $40 billion in cash transfers from the US back to India every year!

India’s response adds another perspective to the debate. Investigators still must determine whether the affected employers followed recruitment requirements and gave qualified U.S. born applicants genuine “first” consideration.

Credential verification is another part of the accountability question. In the September 18, 2026 Executive Order, published in the Federal Register on September 23, the administration identified “questionable foreign degrees from diploma mills” submitted in support of H-1B applications among the abuses flagged by federal investigations. There is also reporting that Indian workers are notorious for using fake degrees to get H-1B approval, including in American Healthcare, where India is the biggest source country for physicians and surgeons in the U.S., and the second largest for registered nurses. That concern warrants scrutiny of applicants’ credentials and employers’ supporting documentation.

It is no wonder why the US companies turn their cheeks to this fraudulent act; because the US companies want the low-wage earner; and India also backs the fraud, as they receive the benefits to their own country at the back end.

Connecting the Dots to Medical Training Pathways

These developments arrive against the backdrop of longstanding questions about the role of H-1B and J-1 visas in U.S. graduate medical education — the same questions raised in earlier reporting on residency programs such as Rochester General Hospital’s Internal Medicine program recently selecting 81 Foreign-born residents and only 2 American-born residents.

National data show International Medical Graduates (IMGs) comprising roughly one-quarter of the U.S. physician workforce and a higher share in primary-care specialties. IMG describes where a physician attended medical school, not citizenship or visa status. J-1 is the most common visa for foreign physicians entering U.S. training; H-1B is also used during and after training. Risk-adjusted studies found modestly lower mortality for patients of IMG internists (BMJ 2017) and comparable mortality for patients of IMG surgeons (Annals of Surgery 2021). Those studies do not, however, resolve questions of selection, wage effects, or the availability of qualified U.S. applicants for specific programs.

And while the October 8^th actions do not directly target medical residencies, they do, however, signal a broader federal willingness to scrutinize the labor-market certifications and wage claims that underpin both industry H-1B/PERM filings and the academic use of J-1 researchers. Arizona State University’s inclusion brings the issue home to Arizona, where large research universities and major hospital systems both draw on international talent pipelines.

What Remains Open

The administration has not yet published the methodology behind the 61 percent / 38 percent J-1 research figures or institution-level data for ASU.
No findings of wrongdoing have been announced; the university investigations are at the subpoena stage.
The PERM suspensions are indefinite and tied to ongoing investigations; they do not revoke existing H-1B status.
Specific counts of U.S.-citizen versus visa-holder applicants, interviewees, and ranked candidates for medical residency classes — information requested earlier from programs such as Rochester General — remain unpublished by most institutions.

As the Visa Fraud Strike Team proceeds and the Labor Department processes (or declines) PERM filings, investigators should publish their methodology and substantiated findings. Until then, the public record consists of the administration’s allegations, the companies’ and universities’ compliance statements, and the long-running statistical patterns in both tech and medical workforce data.

ASU should explain how research positions are advertised, how applicants are evaluated, and how equivalent work is compensated. The public deserves records that establish whether qualified American-born applicants received fair consideration — and whether taxpayer-funded hiring followed the rules.

A Suspension & Investigation Are A Beginning

American-born students have been experiencing widespread VISA discrimination starting after High School, and continuing through College and Post-Graduate programs, and in the job marketplace.

And despite decades of complaints from both students, job seekers, and their parents to government officials and elected leaders, there has been little recognition nor remedial action until lately. The current Visa Fraud Task Force and Strike Team is a welcome start.

However, the Success of the October 8^th announcements and providing Visa Fraud Accountability, ultimately will depend on whether investigations produce enforceable findings, recruitment practices that actually change, and qualified American-born applicants receiving genuine “first” consideration.

And those results will hopefully help answer the question I raised earlier: When does the American-born worker get First Consideration?

Support Joe's Work

Federal Visa Crackdown Finally Hits Arizona State University and Expands Beyond Tech…