A significant legal conflict is unfolding in the US over the new requirements of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) concerning so-called non-domiciled CDL. Several professional and advocacy organizations have filed a lawsuit, claiming that the regulator exceeded its authority and jeopardized the jobs of thousands of drivers.
In September 2025, FMCSA announced the introduction of a temporary emergency rule tightening the issuance of CDL to drivers without a permanent residence in the US. The regulator stated that the measure is necessary to enhance road safety and eliminate "systemic violations" at the state level.
In an official statement, FMCSA emphasized that it is about protecting public safety:
"Our duty is to ensure that only drivers who meet all federal safety requirements are behind the wheel of commercial vehicles," the agency stated.
This position is outlined in the FMCSA press release on the agency's official website: FMCSA statement on emergency measures for non-domiciled CDL.
The plaintiffs argue that FMCSA used the "emergency rule" mechanism without sufficient grounds, effectively bypassing the standard public discussion procedure. In their opinion, the new requirements could lead to mass job losses for drivers who previously legally obtained CDL in states like California.
As noted by the industry publication The Trucker, the lawsuit is directed against the very logic of urgency and scale of the changes, as well as against the lack of a transition period for current drivers: The Trucker article on the lawsuit against FMCSA.
The situation has been most acute in California, where tens of thousands of commercial licenses are under threat. After lawsuits were filed on behalf of drivers, state authorities temporarily suspended the revocation of some CDLs. This, in turn, provoked a strong reaction from the federal government, including threats of financial sanctions.
The agency Associated Press quotes representatives of state and federal structures, emphasizing that the conflict has gone beyond purely transportation regulation and touched on issues of immigration policy and states' rights: AP News report on the CDL conflict in California.
Currently, the disputed rule is suspended by the court until the end of the proceedings. This means that states temporarily continue to operate under the old procedures, but uncertainty remains. The outcome of the case could affect not only thousands of drivers but also the balance of power between federal agencies and states.
For the trucking industry, this is another signal of how closely safety, immigration, and economic issues are intertwined today—and how quickly regulatory changes can alter the rules of the game.