Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee joined Republicans in questioning why Amazon and other major corporations are laying off U.S. workers while hiring thousands of foreign employees through the H-1B visa program.

On September 24, Democratic and Republican senators sent a letter to Amazon CEO Andy Jassy demanding answers about the company’s employment practices. The letter cited Reuters reporting that Amazon “cut at least hundreds of jobs in its Amazon Web Services cloud computing unit” this summer, while continuing to sponsor H-1B visa holders.

“This can’t continue,” Senate Judiciary Democrats posted on X alongside a copy of the letter:

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DALLAS EXPRESS APP

 

The senators’ inquiry noted that Amazon has laid off tens of thousands of workers in recent years while simultaneously hiring more H-1B employees than any other U.S. company. According to the letter, Amazon received approval for at least 10,044 H-1B workers in fiscal year 2025 — nearly double the number of H-1 B workers approved for the next-highest employer.

“With all of the homegrown American talent relegated to the sidelines, we find it hard to believe that Amazon cannot find qualified American tech workers to fill these positions,” Sens. Chuck Grassley and Dick Durbin wrote.

The letter asked Amazon to explain by October 10 whether it displaces U.S. workers, how it sets wages for foreign hires, and if it hides H-1B recruitment ads from the general public.

The bipartisan scrutiny follows years of tension over how the H-1B visa program interacts with widespread layoffs in the technology sector. Lawmakers also wrote to Apple, JPMorgan, Microsoft, Alphabet’s Google, Meta, Walmart, Deloitte, Cognizant, and Tata Consultancy Services with similar requests, Reuters reported. India accounts for about 72% of H-1B recipients, with China representing another 12%, according to federal data.

Big Tech companies have argued that the visas are critical for filling highly specialized roles. Critics argue that they undercut American wages and enable corporations to replace U.S. workers with cheaper labor.

The issue has gained momentum as both parties weigh reforms. President Donald Trump announced in mid-September that companies would be required to pay a $100,000 fee for each new H-1B petition. At the same time, his administration has proposed changes to prioritize higher-skilled and higher-paid applicants, DX reported.

Congress is also considering new restrictions.

Republican Sen. Jim Banks of Indiana introduced legislation this month to raise the minimum H-1B salary to $150,000, end the Optional Practical Training program for foreign graduates, and replace the lottery-based distribution with a bidding model. “Corporations rigged the system to flood the country with cheap foreign labor and drive down wages,” Banks said in a statement reported by DX.

Not all Democratic legislators are in agreement.

At the end of President Joe Biden’s term, he loosened H-1B visa regulations to broaden the definition of a specialty occupation, extended cap exemptions for research organizations, and made gestures toward using the H-1B visa as a means to provide legal status to DACA recipients. Some Senate Democrats, such as Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, cheered, calling on him to continue expanding the program, per statements reported by The Hill.

Companies have largely remained silent in the face of mounting questions.

Amazon, Walmart, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, and Cognizant did not respond to requests for comment from Reuters. Texas Instruments, which has faced similar criticism for layoffs while employing 937 H-1B workers since 2020, also did not comment when contacted by DX.

The Department of Labor requires H-1B wages to match or exceed the local prevailing wage rate, although what constitutes a prevailing wage is broad. Lawmakers say the gap between federal rules and actual hiring practices has left thousands of young American engineers and computer science graduates unemployed or underemployed.

With Congress demanding answers and the White House moving ahead with new restrictions, the future of the program may soon look very different for corporations and workers alike.