Immigrant Truckers Fight California DMV Over License Cancellations

In a significant legal battle, nearly 20,000 immigrant truckers are facing the potential loss of their livelihoods as the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) plans to revoke their commercial drivers’ licenses (CDLs). This class-action lawsuit, filed in December 2023 by the Asian Law Caucus, the Sikh Coalition, and the law firm Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, aims to prevent what could become a critical disruption to the state’s transportation industry. The lawsuit represents the Jakara Movement—a grassroots organization supporting Punjabi Sikhs and other marginalized communities—and five commercial drivers who stand to lose their ability to work. According to the legal filing, the California DMV notified 17,299 immigrant drivers in November that their non-domiciled CDLs would be canceled on January 5, 2026, with an additional 2,700 drivers receiving similar notices in December about mid-February cancellations. Despite public assurances from state officials that they would begin reissuing licenses on December 17, no concrete action has been taken, leaving thousands of drivers in limbo and uncertain about their futures.

The heart of the dispute centers on technical discrepancies in license expiration dates. California regulations require the DMV to set CDL expiration dates to match or occur before the expiration of a driver’s work authorization or legal presence documents. However, the lawsuit alleges that the DMV failed to consistently follow this procedure and is now attempting to cancel these licenses without offering drivers an opportunity to correct the issue or contest the cancellation. This approach contradicts California’s own procedures, which would typically require the department to either cancel licenses without prejudice or change the expiration dates to comply with regulations. The situation became more complicated after a public disagreement between federal authorities and California’s government, with the U.S. Department of Transportation announcing that California planned to revoke these licenses, while Governor Gavin Newsom’s office contested claims that the state had “illegally issued” the CDLs in the first place. This back-and-forth has created confusion for the affected drivers, many of whom have valid work authorizations and believed they were in compliance with state regulations.

The human impact of this bureaucratic dispute extends far beyond paperwork and regulations. For the thousands of drivers affected, these licenses represent their ability to provide for their families and maintain stable employment. One plaintiff, identified as John Doe 4, reportedly received a cancellation notice despite having a CDL that expires on the same day as his work authorization—the very document he used to renew the license. This suggests potential errors in the DMV’s identification process. Another disturbing account involves a Jakara Movement member who, upon visiting a DMV office to address concerns about the cancellation, was allegedly “pressured into surrendering his CDL out of fear that his non-commercial driver’s license would already be cancelled.” These personal stories highlight the real-world consequences of administrative actions that might otherwise seem like mere policy adjustments. Many of these drivers have built their lives around careers in transportation, investing time and resources into obtaining and maintaining their commercial licenses, only to face sudden uncertainty through no apparent fault of their own.

The broader economic implications of this situation cannot be overstated. As the lawsuit emphasizes, these commercial drivers “play an indispensable role in our local and national economies, providing essential services that communities rely on every day.” They transport food, drive school buses, deliver manufactured goods, and maintain the supply chains that keep California—and by extension, much of the country—functioning. The sudden removal of nearly 20,000 qualified drivers from the workforce would create significant disruptions in these essential services, potentially leading to delivery delays, increased transportation costs, and ripple effects throughout the economy. Small businesses that rely on these drivers would face particular hardship, possibly forcing some to close and leading to additional job losses beyond just the affected drivers. This scenario would be especially problematic given California’s position as a major agricultural producer and goods distribution hub for the western United States.

The timing of this issue is particularly challenging, as it follows a period when the trucking industry was already facing significant pressures. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the essential nature of transportation workers while simultaneously creating unprecedented strains on supply chains. Labor shortages in the trucking sector have been a persistent challenge, with industry groups regularly reporting difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified drivers. Removing thousands of experienced drivers from the workforce would exacerbate these existing problems. Furthermore, many of the affected drivers belong to immigrant communities that have historically filled critical roles in the transportation sector, bringing valuable skills and work ethic to an industry that struggles to attract new workers. The situation raises questions about the balance between immigration enforcement and pragmatic workforce policies, especially in essential industries that directly impact public welfare and economic stability.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to require the California DMV to ensure that they can obtain corrected CDLs “without interruption to their driving privileges.” This relatively straightforward remedy would allow the drivers to continue working while addressing any technical compliance issues with their licenses. The lawsuit also questions the DMV’s process, noting that the department “has not explained how it identified 19,999 licenses as out of compliance with state law and how it can ensure that its determinations are accurate.” This lack of transparency compounds the challenges faced by affected drivers, who are left unable to effectively address potential errors in their individual cases. The conflict also reflects broader tensions in immigration policy, as the initial crackdown on CDL issuance was reportedly launched during the Trump administration following fatal crashes involving non-domiciled CDL holders. As the legal process unfolds, thousands of immigrant drivers and their families remain in an uncertain position, balancing their commitment to essential work against bureaucratic obstacles that threaten their economic security and place in their communities.