Executive Summary

In the second half of 2025, the transportation industry witnessed a significant shift in commercial driver’s license (CDL) oversight by the United States Department of Transportation (DOT), which continues today, altering liability risk for providers of transportation services. This legal alert provides practical guidance to help companies successfully navigate the changing regulatory landscape and limit liability in the year ahead, including:

• Steps a transportation provider can take to ensure that the drivers with which it works — whether they are employees or contractors — are compliant with existing and new DOT requirements.
• Specific guidance on driver hiring and supervision to assess and minimize potential disruption to operations.
• How to avoid liability under federal and state, particularly California, antidiscrimination laws when exercising greater oversight of employee and contracted drivers.

By taking these steps in concert, transportation providers will be able to more quickly adapt their operations to remain compliant and maintain service, even as scrutiny of the transportation industry continues to evolve in 2026.

Introduction: Increased and Sustained Federal CDL Oversight

On September 29, 2025, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published an emergency interim final rule (IFR) substantially revising the criteria for issuing and renewing non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (non-domiciled CDLs).¹

The regulation directed state driver licensing agencies (SDLAs) to (1) suspend issuance of non-domiciled CDLs under the prior regulatory framework, (2) audit and revoke previously issued licenses that did not meet the preexisting eligibility requirements, and (3) adopt heightened verification procedures for employment authorization to narrow the pool of individuals eligible for non-domiciled CDLs. The IFR’s objective was to address “an imminent hazard on America’s roadways” arising from improper or unverified licensure of non-domiciled drivers.

The IFR had a near-immediate, significant impact on transportation capacity and transportation providers in the trucking, logistics, and public transit industries. The IFR’s impact was driven by three factors: (1) it prevented new drivers from entering the workforce with non-domiciled CDLs, (2) it removed existing non-domiciled CDLs that were previously improperly issued, and (3) it cast doubt on the legitimacy of all issued non-domiciled CDLs.² On November 10, 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of enforcement pending the outcome of litigation challenging the validity of the IFR. However, many SDLAs had already taken steps such as ceasing issuance of new and renewed non-domiciled CDLs, which have not been reversed as a result of the stay.

Meanwhile, since the IFR’s publication, the DOT has lead an array of CDL-related initiatives. DOT and SDLAs have continued to scrutinize all CDLs, both non-domiciled and standard licenses, to assess whether they were validly issued in the first place. Secretary Duffy has called for every state to conduct its own audit of previously issued CDLs, and some states have already responded by revoking non-domiciled CDLs.³ Also, the DOT also has begun auditing CDL training schools.⁴ And, recent reporting indicates that the Department of Homeland Security may be auditing the employment and work-authorization eligibility of truck drivers in California.⁵

The rapidly evolving and aggressive approach to CDL oversight undertaken by the Trump Administration has forced transportation providers to reevaluate how they hire, contract with, and manage drivers.

I. Transportation Providers: Knowing What and What Not to Ask About Drivers

Prospective changes to non-domiciled CDLs and general scrutiny over the current CDL licensing regime has left transportation providers in a precarious position when hiring new drivers, contracting with other transportation companies, or evaluating their current driver workforces. But in conducting their due diligence, to limit liability and potential disruption to their operations, transportation providers need to know what is permitted under federal and state labor, employment, and immigration laws.

A. Permissible Questions to Applicants and Existing Drivers (Employees and Contractors)

As a general matter, transportation providers may ask job-related, license-related, and safety-related questions consistent with the requirements of the position when hiring new drivers, contracting with transportation providers, and supervising existing drivers. Those topics include:

1. CDL Status and Eligibility to Operate a Commercial Motor Vehicle

Transportation providers may lawfully request and incorporate contractual provisions addressing:

• Whether drivers currently hold CDLs and what type(s) of CDLs (Class A/B/C).
• Whether the CDLs are state-issued, non-domiciled, or under review by an SDLA due to the IFR or other regulatory actions.
• The license numbers, state(s) of issuance, and expiration date(s).
• Whether any CDL has been revoked, suspended, cancelled, or flagged for re-verification, and for any official SDLA notice or documentation directly related to the validity of the license held.

Similarly, transportation providers may also ask and incorporate contractual provisions addressing:

• Whether individuals are legally authorized to work in the United States (the standard federal inquiry permitted by the United states Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)).
• Whether individuals are legally eligible to operate commercial motor vehicles under federal and state law.

These inquiries are generally permissible because they relate directly to job qualifications, work authorization, and FMCSA compliance.

2. Prior Driving History and Safety Record

In evaluating a driver’s qualifications, transportation providers may request:

• CDL training school or program utilized in obtaining the license.
• Motor Vehicle Records (MVRs) from each state of licensure.
• Safety performance history, as permitted by FMCSA’s driver-investigation requirements.

B. Prohibited Questions to Applicants and Existing Drivers (Employees and Contractors)

Transportation providers, however, may not seek information beyond what is necessary to determine CDL validity or work authorization. Specifically, they must not ask:

• What countries of applicants are citizens.
• Whether applicants are U.S. citizens, except to ask the standard “Are you legally authorized to work in the United States?”
• Whether applicant are permanent residents, visa holders, or hold other specific immigration classifications.

Transportation providers operating in California must be particularly careful. California Government Code Section 12940 prohibits inquiries that “expressly or implicitly” reveal immigration status, unless required by federal law. Because the existing non-domiciled CDL issuing regulations, IFR, or any other DOT CDL initiative do not require hiring entities to inquire into nationality or visa type, California transportation providers must be careful not to exceed the scope of job-related license verification.

In asking for documentation to verify work authorization, transportation providers may only ask for I-9 records, but cannot demand I-9s specifically from individuals who present different acceptable documentation.⁶ Similarly, transportation providers may not inquire about immigration history.

II. Practical Steps for Transportation Providers in Light of DOT’s Current CDL Initiatives

Transportation providers can take several steps to ensure their hiring, supervisory, and contracting practices remain aligned with the rapidly changing CDL regulatory and enforcement landscape. Those steps include:

1. Update interview scripts and application forms to ensure that license-related questions are compliant and immigration-neutral, and information pertaining to drivers’ qualifications are obtained for potential future review.
2. Implement a CDL verification protocol specifically for non-domiciled CDLs, using SDLA notices, MVRs, and Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS) responses — not immigration documents.
3. Train HR, recruiting, and carrier onboarding personnel on prohibited inquiries under federal and state law.
4. Document all employment and contracting decisions based solely on (i) CDL validity, (ii) SDLA revocation notices, (iii) lawful work authorization, and (iv) sufficient and valid training qualifications. Documentation should reflect when the employer learned of the CDL issue and what specific SDLA or CDLIS notice triggered the action.
5. Re-verify existing drivers’ CDLs only through permissible methods (e.g., SDLA notices, MVR updates).
6. Avoid re-verification of I-9 documents unless required by law (e.g., expiring employment authorization), and ensure that any such action is uniformly applied.
7. Consult state-specific counsel before adverse action involving a CDL holder, particularly one holding a non-domiciled CDL, and particularly in California, New York, Illinois, and other jurisdictions with restrictive anti-discrimination laws.
8. Assess validity and sufficiency of existing drivers’ licenses and qualifications to anticipate potential disruptions as a result of the DOT’s ongoing CDL oversight initiatives.
9. Revise transportation services contracts to specifically incorporate provisions requiring compliance with DOT driver training and licensing initiatives.

---

California Supplement: Transportation Providers Operating in California

Complying with the DOT’s CDL initiatives and evolving non-domiciled CDL regulations present unique challenges for providers of transportation services. Additional challenges await those operating in California.

In California, transportation provider inquiries and documentation-handling practices are also constrained by California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), Labor Code, Immigrant Worker Protection Act (AB 450), and related privacy and antidiscrimination requirements. As a result, transportation providers operating in California must align compliance with DOT CDL oversight initiatives with the State’s uniquely restrictive rules governing immigration-related inquiries.

This supplement explains California-specific limitations for interviewing, screening, hiring, or re-evaluating CDL holders; identifies which documents may be requested or reviewed in California; clarifies documentation-retention restrictions; and outlines California-specific risk-mitigation steps.

I. California’s General Rule: No Inquiries That Reveal Immigration Status

California Government Code Section 12940 prohibits hiring entities from making any pre-employment or employment inquiries that “expressly or implicitly” reveal an individual’s immigration or citizenship status, unless the inquiry is required by federal law. Because neither FMCSA’s preexisting CDL regulations nor the IFR require transportation providers to assess an individual’s country of citizenship, immigration classification, visa type, or nationality, California transportation providers must avoid any question that risks revealing such information.

Accordingly, California transportation providers must not ask:

• The country of citizenship of an applicant or employee;
• Whether the individual is a lawful permanent resident, visa holder, or undocumented person;
• Whether the individual has previously held any specific immigration status;
• Whether the individual used a foreign passport to obtain a prior non-domiciled CDL; and
• Whether an individual’s immigration status is under review by USCIS.

The only permissible federal inquiry is: “Are you legally authorized to work in the United States?” This must be posed in a uniform manner to all applicants.

While this permitted line of inquiry may be similar to the federal standard articulated above, the threat of enforcement by attentive California enforcement agencies presents a heightened risk for transportation providers based and operating in the state.

II. California Restrictions on Document Requests

California also imposes stricter limits than federal law on which documents hiring entities may request and when those requests may occur.

A. Prohibition on Requesting Immigration Documents (Before or After Offer)

Under both FEHA and the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, California transportation providers may not request:

• Foreign passports;
• Form I-94 arrival/departure records;
• Employment authorization documents (EADs) except through the standard I-9 process;
• Visa documents, consular documents, or proof of nationality; or
• Any document that tends to reveal immigration status, unless expressly required by federal law.

FMCSA requires SDLAs — not transportation providers — to authenticate foreign passports and immigration documents. Therefore, California transportation providers must rely solely on SDLA-issued notices, MVRs, and CDLIS status updates to verify CDL validity.

B. I-9 Document Rules in California

California hiring entities must adhere strictly to federal I-9 rules. Transportation providers may not:

• Specify which documents the employee or contractor must present;
• Request additional documentation;
• Re-verify I-9 documentation except as required by federal regulation; or
• “Reinvestigate” or “re-verify” immigration status unless required by federal law.

Thus, even if a non-domiciled CDL is revoked under the IFR, this may not create grounds for re-verifying a driver’s I-9 documents unless the individual’s work authorization is expiring under federal rules.

III. Permissible Questions by California Transportation Providers

Similar to the federal standard, California transportation providers may request only license-related and job-related information, including:

• Whether the applicant, employee, or contractor currently holds a CDL, including a non-domiciled CDL;
• Whether the CDL has been revoked, suspended, cancelled, or is under review by the California DMV or another SDLA;
• The CDL state of issuance, license number, and expiration date;
• Any SDLA notice of revocation, suspension, or review, as these documents relate to credential validity and not to immigration status;
• Authorization for the transportation provider to obtain an MVR and perform FMCSA-mandated background checks; and
• Certifications of legal eligibility to operate a commercial motor vehicle.

California law permits all inquiries directly related to the ability to meet FMCSA qualifications, so long as the inquiry does not extend into national origin, citizenship, or immigration status.

IV. California Requirements for Reviewing Existing Employees and Contractors with Non-Domiciled CDLs

For current employees and contractors, California’s antidiscrimination rules and retaliation provisions (including FEHA and Labor Code Section 98.6) limit how transportation providers may respond to SDLA revocation or review notices.

A. Transportation Providers May

• Request an SDLA verification of CDL status through DMV channels;
• Require an employee or contractor to provide state-issued notices concerning revocation or review of a CDL;
• Temporarily reassign an employee whose CDL has been suspended or revoked, consistent with FMCSA safety requirements; or
• Remove an employee or contractor from safety-sensitive driving duties if their CDL is invalid.

If contemplating reassignment, employers should assess whether CDL-related reassignment affects compensation structure, overtime eligibility, or exempt status under applicable wage and hour laws.

B. Transportation Providers May Not:

• Request immigration documents explaining why the SDLA is reviewing or revoking a CDL;
• Ask an employee or contractor to provide additional immigration documents beyond the original I-9;
• Ask whether an employee or contractor still holds valid work authorization unless the transportation provider is performing a lawful federal I-9 re-verification;
• Take adverse action based on assumptions about immigration status rather than official SDLA notices or FMCSA determinations.

V. California Document-Retention and Confidentiality Rules

California also imposes the following heightened confidentiality requirements:

• Any SDLA notices, MVRs, or CDLIS records obtained must be stored separately from personnel files where feasible.
• California law requires minimizing dissemination of documents containing personal identifying information.
• Immigration-related information (if incidentally received) must not be used for hiring decisions except as required by federal law.

VI. Risk-Mitigation Steps for California Employers

California transportation providers should take the following measures while SDLA and FMCSA processes evolve:

1. Revise interview scripts to ensure strict separation between license-validity inquiries and immigration status.
2. Audit employment applications to remove any question that could infer immigration status.
3. Train HR and safety departments on FEHA, AB 450, and Labor Code inquiry restrictions.
4. Document all decisions tied specifically to CDL validity, SDLA-issued notices, or FMCSA requirements.
5. Create a decision protocol outlining permissible actions when a non-domiciled CDL is (i) under review, (ii) suspended, or (iii) revoked.
6. Coordinate with counsel before taking adverse action against an employee whose CDL is under review but not yet revoked, given California’s expansive retaliation protections.
7. Avoid selective enforcement; ensure that all drivers, regardless of perceived immigration background, are subject to the same verification procedures.
8. Unionized Transportation Providers must ensure CDL-related actions comply with applicable collective bargaining agreements and related just cause requirements.

Conclusion

Uncertainty over the future of CDL licensing, and the validity of non-domiciled CDLs, require transportation providers to revise their hiring, contracting, and supervision practices. Taking the steps recommended above now, even as the regulatory and enforcement landscape continues to evolve, will enable transportation providers, particularly those based or operating in California, to quickly adapt, minimizing liability and operational disruption.

---

¹ “Non-Domiciled CDLs” refers to licenses issued for driving of certain commercial vehicles (such as large trucks and buses) to anyone who has the legal authority to be in the United States for only a limited time, such as residents of the U.S. who are neither citizens nor lawful permanent residents.

² See Order Granting Administrative Stay of interim final rule titled Restoring Integrity to the Issuance of Non-Domiciled CDLS, FMCSA, available at https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/newsroom/order-granting-administrative-stay-interim-final-rule-titled-restoring-integrity-issuance (Nov. 13, 2025).

³ NEWSOM CAUGHT REDHANDED, U.S. DOT, available at https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/newsom-caught-redhanded-trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-exposes (Nov. 12, 2025).

⁴ Trump’s Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy Cracks Down on Illegal Providers of Commercial Driver’s License Test Training Centers, U.S. DOT, available at https://www.transportation.gov/briefing-room/trumps-transportation-secretary-sean-p-duffy-cracks-down-illegal-providers-commercial (Dec. 1, 2025).

⁵ Craig Fuller, DHS launches sweeping I-9 audits on California truck fleets, FreightWaves, https://www.freightwaves.com/news/dhs-launches-sweeping-i-9-audits-on-california-truck-fleets (Nov. 30, 2025).

⁶ Form I-9 Acceptable Documents, DHS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, https://www.uscis.gov/i-9-central/form-i-9-acceptable-documents; IER’s Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs), U.S. DOJ, Civil Rights Division; Instructions for Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, DHS U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, https://www.justice.gov/crt/file/989346/dl?inline.