The Gold Card was created by an executive order, not by a statute. Executive Order 14351, of 19 September 2025, directed the Department of Commerce to create a program in which a one-million-dollar donation to the Department itself, or two million where made by a company for an employee, is treated as evidence that the person qualifies under immigration categories that already exist.
Understanding that architecture is understanding the program's limits. Anyone weighing the Gold Card is really weighing an evidentiary route into the EB-1 and the EB-2, with a new layer of procedure and a new layer of risk. It is not a new visa category, and the order itself says so.
The exact design of the order
The text is precise on three points that promotional material tends to blur. The first is the basis for the donation: the Department of Commerce's general authority to accept gifts, with the funds going to a fund for promoting American commerce and industry.
The second is the effect of the donation. It counts as evidence of extraordinary ability for the EB-1, as evidence of exceptional ability in business and of national benefit for the EB-2, and as evidence for the national interest waiver. No new category is created, and the order expressly subjects implementation to the numerical visa limits the statute already sets.
The third is what the order itself declares: it creates no right or benefit enforceable in court. There is also provision for a company to transfer the benefit to another employee it designates, subject to fresh vetting, and a study of a future extension to the EB-5.
How the process works today
Implementation runs through an official portal and a dedicated petition adjudicated by USCIS. The published sequence is: you apply on the portal and pay a fifteen-thousand-dollar processing fee per person, non-refundable; you complete the petition with documents; you go through background vetting; and only after clearing that vetting is the donation requested. From there, the case proceeds under the EB-1 or the EB-2, with a consular interview and the State Department's own fees.
Each dependent, spouse or child, pays their own fifteen-thousand-dollar fee and their own one-million-dollar donation. For company sponsorship, the portal announces an annual maintenance fee of 1% and a transfer fee of 5%. It is worth running that arithmetic for the whole family before any decision, because it tends to surprise.
The lawsuit, and where it stands
The program is the subject of a suit in the federal court for the District of Columbia, American Association of University Professors v. DHS, filed in February 2026 against the Departments of Homeland Security, Commerce and State. The complaint sets out seven grounds, among them violation of the visa categories created by statute, misuse of Commerce's gift authority, and the absence of the public comment process that making a rule would require.
As of 30 August 2026, per public docket tracking: the government moved to dismiss on the ground that the plaintiffs lack standing, without addressing the merits; there is no request for a preliminary injunction; there is no decision of any kind, interim or final; and the government's response is due by 1 September 2026. We state the limit of our checking: we follow the public docket and specialist sources, not the court's paid system.
The recommendation we make to anyone considering this route is simple. Treat the program as legally unstable, decide on advice current in the week of the decision, and never on promotional material. And compare it first with the ordinary EB-1 and EB-2 routes, which still exist with no donation at all. For many people who come to us interested in the Gold Card, the shorter path turns out to be one of those.
Legal basis
- Executive Order 14351, of 19 September 2025, published at 90 FR 46031: the donation mechanism is in section 2, the subjection to visa limits and the fees in section 3, and the no-enforceable-right clause in section 5(c). The gift authority comes from 15 U.S.C. § 1522.
- Official notices for the program's dedicated form: 91 FR 11559, of 10 March 2026, and 91 FR 32074, of 29 May 2026, with the official volume estimates.
- Official program portal, public content read on 24 August 2026: the sequence of the process, the fees and the warnings.
- American Association of University Professors v. DHS, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, No. 1:26-cv-00300: public docket checked on 24 and 30 August 2026, with the complaint and the motion to dismiss read in part, and no decision located as of that date.
- The program has no regulation and may change by executive action or by court decision at any time: confirm its current state before any decision.
Verified 24 August 2026. Written from Executive Order 14351, published at 90 FR 46031, from the Form I-140G notices at 91 FR 11559 and 91 FR 32074, in full, and from the public content of the program's official portal, read the same day. The lawsuit's progress was verified on the case's public docket on 24 Aug 2026, with the principal filings read in part, as declared in the text. The program has no regulation and may change by executive act or court decision at any time: confirm the current state before any decision.
General informational content. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Immigration rules change frequently and may be enjoined by a court. Before acting, confirm that the rule is in force and consult an attorney about your own circumstances.