Federal Court Strikes Down DOT’s Immigrant CDL Restrictions
In a significant ruling on Thursday, a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. determined that the Department of Transportation’s restrictions on immigrants obtaining commercial driver’s licenses cannot be enforced. The court found that the federal government failed to follow proper procedural requirements when creating these new rules and did not adequately explain how the restrictions would enhance road safety. This decision comes in the wake of a September announcement by the DOT that sought to tighten regulations after an incident involving an illegal immigrant truck driver who was accused of causing a fatal crash in Fort Pierce, Florida. The case involved Harjinder Singh, an Indian citizen who allegedly entered the U.S. illegally from Mexico in 2018 and was later charged with three counts of vehicular homicide and three counts of manslaughter after his truck jackknifed during an alleged illegal U-turn, resulting in a deadly collision with a van.
The court’s ruling highlighted some compelling statistics that seemed to contradict the premise of the restrictions. According to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration data cited by the judges, immigrants hold approximately 5% of all commercial driver’s licenses but account for only about 0.2% of fatal crashes—a significantly lower proportion than their overall representation among CDL holders. The case of Singh raised particular concerns about licensing procedures, as records indicated he had failed his CDL knowledge exam in Washington state ten times within two months, failed his air brakes knowledge exam twice, and did not pass an English proficiency test. Despite these failures, he had obtained a license in California. An audit of California’s records revealed that many immigrants’ licenses remained valid long after their work permits had expired, leading the state to revoke 17,000 licenses.
The DOT’s now-blocked restrictions would have allowed immigrants holding three specific classes of visas to obtain commercial licenses valid for one year and would have required immigration status verification through a federal database. Though the rules would have disqualified approximately 10,000 of the 200,000 current immigrant commercial license holders, the implementation approach meant drivers could keep their licenses until expiration. The restrictions came after growing concerns about licensing standards and qualifications among immigrant drivers. California, in particular, has faced criticism for its approach to enforcing English language requirements for truck drivers, with Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announcing in October that the administration was withholding $40 million from the state over this issue. To regain this funding, California would need to ensure state inspectors test truck drivers’ English proficiency during roadside inspections and remove those who fail.
The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), representing more than 150,000 independent owner-operators, had expressed support for the administration’s efforts before the court ruling. In an August statement, OOIDA president Todd Spencer thanked the administration for “seeing through the myth of a truck driver shortage” and working to “restore commonsense safety standards on our nation’s highways.” Spencer argued that pausing visas for commercial truck drivers would help ensure only qualified individuals receive licenses while having minimal negative impact on the supply chain, as he claimed the trucking industry continues to face overcapacity rather than a shortage of drivers. His statement further suggested that the misuse of visa programs, combined with the increase in non-domiciled CDL holders, had led to an influx of drivers who struggle to operate safely and comply with regulations.
The court’s decision reflects the ongoing tension between immigration policies and transportation safety concerns. While the DOT argued that the restrictions were necessary to enhance road safety, the court found that the agency had not provided sufficient evidence to support this claim or followed the proper administrative procedures required when implementing new regulations. This ruling comes amid broader national debates about immigration enforcement and the balance between national security interests and workforce needs in critical industries like transportation. The case highlights the complex interplay between immigration status, professional licensing, and public safety, as well as the challenges of creating policies that effectively address these intersecting concerns.
This situation underscores the difficulties in navigating the regulatory landscape where immigration policy meets transportation safety. The blocked restrictions were part of a larger effort to address concerns about qualification standards and safety compliance among commercial drivers, particularly those who are non-citizens. The ruling does not necessarily reject the substance of the DOT’s concerns but rather focuses on procedural deficiencies in how the restrictions were implemented. As this issue continues to develop, it will likely remain at the intersection of immigration policy, workforce management in the transportation sector, and public safety considerations. The ultimate resolution may require a more comprehensive approach that addresses legitimate safety concerns while also respecting procedural requirements and the realities of the current commercial transportation workforce.
