California’s high-stakes fight over who can hold a commercial driver’s license is now shaping federal enforcement well beyond the state’s borders. In the last 48 hours, a federal appeals court in Washington put the U.S. Department of Transportation’s new limits on non‑domiciled CDLs on hold, even as California moves to cancel thousands of licenses that state officials say were issued with expiration dates that didn’t match holders’ federal work authorization.
What’s changing in California: State officials said they are revoking 17,000 CDLs because the cards were set to expire after the drivers’ legal authorization to work—an inconsistency that violates state law. The DMV began sending 60‑day notices on November 6, meaning affected licenses could lapse in early January unless holders requalify. The action follows a federal audit that, according to USDOT, found irregularities in roughly a quarter of the California sample; Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office counters that the drivers had valid federal work authorization and that the issue centers on state expiration‑date rules, not immigration status.
Meanwhile in Washington: On November 14, the D.C. Circuit temporarily blocked the Transportation Department’s interim final rule that would have sharply restricted which non‑citizens can obtain a CDL—limiting eligibility to narrow visa categories and requiring status verification through federal databases. The court’s stay means the September rule cannot take effect while litigation proceeds. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration has acknowledged the stay and told states they may continue issuing non‑domiciled CDLs under the prior framework—except for states placed on corrective action plans, which must keep their pauses in place.
Why it matters for fleets and drivers: The combination of California’s targeted cancellations and a nationwide rule now in limbo creates a patchwork of risk. California’s 60‑day clock compresses staffing decisions for carriers that rely on non‑domiciled drivers in drayage, agriculture, and regional haul. At the same time, the court’s stay removes immediate federal pressure on other states to restrict eligibility—at least for now—reducing near‑term disruption but prolonging uncertainty about future credential standards and renewal timelines.
The ripple effects are already visible outside California. Nevada, for example, announced it is phasing out its non‑domiciled CDL program, saying nearly 1,000 drivers could be affected as the state aligns with federal expectations. That signals more states may recalibrate their programs even while the federal rule is paused, a dynamic that could shift driver supply across regional markets.
What trucking should do next: Carriers running in or through California should immediately audit driver files to ensure every CDL’s expiration date aligns with the underlying federal work authorization, build contingencies for January scheduling, and be ready to re‑onboard affected drivers once documentation is corrected. Nationally, compliance teams should track the litigation calendar in the D.C. Circuit, monitor whether their home states fall under FMCSA corrective action, and prepare for renewed federal rulemaking or guidance that could tighten eligibility again. In short: plan for volatility, not a quick resolution.
The politics aren’t going away. California and USDOT are trading accusations over safety and compliance, and both sides are invoking audit findings and crash investigations to justify their stances. With the court stepping in, the next several months will likely bring more state‑by‑state adjustments—and another round of federal moves—before the industry gets a stable rule set. For now, the California showdown has become the template for how enforcement fights over CDLs will play out nationally.
Sources: FreightWaves, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, FMCSA, Overdrive
This article was prepared exclusively for TruckStopInsider.com. Republishing is permitted only with proper credit and a link back to the original source.
