For four Meta employees on company-sponsored work visas, this year’s layoffs could mean more than losing their jobs. They also face the possibility of losing their legal status in the United States if they cannot find a new employer within the limited grace period after their employment ends. Their situation has now become a focal point in a legal challenge against Meta’s latest workforce reduction, with a federal judge directing the company to explain why these visa holders were selected for termination.
A federal judge has refused to temporarily stop Meta’s layoff plans but has raised questions about the impact on four employees whose work visas are sponsored by the company. While denying a temporary restraining order sought by a broader group of workers, U.S. District Judge William Orrick said the immigration consequences faced by these visa holders warrant closer scrutiny.
READ: Meta layoff forces H-1B worker to leave US (July 14, 2026)
The lawsuit was filed by 26 current and former Meta employees, who allege the company relied on AI-assisted tools during this year’s layoffs. Several plaintiffs also claim they were on maternity leave, medical leave, or had disability accommodations when they were selected for termination.
In an order issued on July 17, Judge Orrick directed Meta to submit an explanation by July 23 detailing “how and why” the four employees sponsored on Meta work visas were selected for termination. The workers are identified in court documents as Does 4, 9, 15 and 26.
The court noted that employees on company-sponsored visas face consequences that go beyond financial losses. Once their employment ends, they may have only a 60-day grace period to find another employer willing to sponsor their visa. If they are unable to secure a new sponsoring employer within the grace period, they risk losing their lawful immigration status in the United States.
Judge Orrick observed that while losses such as wages, stock compensation, or health insurance could potentially be addressed through arbitration, the immigration impact on visa holders is far more difficult to reverse. He wrote that the risks faced by these employees are “more than speculation.”
The broader lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, claims Meta used a combination of AI-generated performance scores and internal workplace data during layoffs that reportedly affected around 8,000 employees.
According to the complaint, the company evaluated workers using AI-generated ratings along with productivity data and other internal activity signals. According to the lawsuit, employees on protected leave were placed at a disadvantage because their time away from work resulted in lower activity levels used in the evaluation process.
READ: Meta faces possible action in India over ads promoting child abuse (July 6, 2026)
One plaintiff alleges she was notified of her layoff just two days before giving birth while on approved pregnancy leave. Another employee claims his performance rating declined after taking leave to recover from an injury, while a manager says he was laid off shortly after beginning medical leave.
The lawsuit contends that Meta relied on AI systems to help score and rank employees instead of placing greater weight on evaluations from managers who directly supervised their work.
The employees are seeking reinstatement, back pay, restoration of lost benefits and equity awards, as well as an independent audit of Meta’s AI-driven evaluation process.
Meta has denied the allegations. Speaking to The Guardian, a Meta spokesperson said the claims “lack merit and are not based on facts,” while maintaining that workforce and organizational decisions “were and are made by people, not AI.”