Nine Republican state attorneys general are urging the Surface Transportation Board to put Union Pacific’s $85 billion bid for Norfolk Southern under a microscope, arguing that the coast-to-coast railroad it would create could erode competition, raise shippers’ costs and even touch national security. Their warning landed Nov. 14, the same day shareholders at both railroads overwhelmingly backed the transaction that would stitch together a 50,000-plus‑mile network across 43 states.
In a letter to federal rail regulators, the AGs — led by Tennessee’s Jonathan Skrmetti and Kansas’ Kris Kobach — said consolidation on this scale risks kneecapping U.S. manufacturers and agricultural producers if domestic transport costs rise. That, they argued, could weaken the nation’s industrial base with downstream implications for security.
For trucking, the stakes are practical and immediate. A single-line UP–NS system would aim to reduce handoffs in key interchange hubs such as Chicago, which could shift intermodal routing, drayage patterns and bid strategies for shippers toggling between highway and rail. Carriers should brace for lane-level volatility as customers test service options and pricing leverage on long-haul east–west corridors, while near-term uncertainty likely keeps the status quo in place until regulators set a timeline and conditions for any integration.
The shareholder approvals give the railroads momentum, but regulatory review will be the uphill part. Both companies say they plan to file their full application imminently, setting up a lengthy STB process that could stretch a year or more.
Supporters of the merger contend that a unified network would cut dwell, simplify interline moves and deliver faster, more reliable service — benefits they say would make rail a stronger competitor to long-haul trucking and lower overall logistics costs. But the AGs’ filing underscores how opposition is coalescing around price and service risk, especially for chemicals and agriculture — sectors that depend on predictable, affordable rail to feed domestic supply chains and export flows.
The political map behind the letter is notable: the signatories span the heartland and Sun Belt — Tennessee, Kansas, Ohio, Florida, North Dakota, South Dakota, Mississippi, Montana and Iowa — states with extensive farm, energy and manufacturing footprints and deep intermodal links into trucking networks. Their coalition signals that scrutiny won’t come only from coastal shippers or rival railroads but also from regions where rail-to-truck dynamics are most sensitive to pricing and service shifts.
What to watch next for motor carriers and intermodal providers: possible STB conditions to protect competitive gateways, preserve access at ramps and prevent foreclosure of key lanes — measures that can materially shape how much freight tilts toward rail versus highway, and where drayage demand concentrates. Until then, expect shippers to run “optionality drills” — spreading volumes, shortening contract tenors and testing truckload coverage on lanes where rail pricing power could tighten if the deal advances.
Sources: FreightWaves, Reuters, The Associated Press, Union Pacific, Norfolk Southern
This article was prepared exclusively for TruckStopInsider.com. Republishing is permitted only with proper credit and a link back to the original source.
