IMPORTANT — Non-Domiciled License Update
FMCSA has now issued preliminary determination of non-compliance letters to 18 states:
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- District of Columbia
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Maine
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- New York
- North Dakota
- Oklahoma
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Texas
- Vermont
- Washington
It is likely that any state in substantial non-compliance will be instructed by FMCSA to cancel non-compliant licenses, and if they have not already done so, will be sending cancellation letters to affected drivers. States have taken varying approaches to the timing of cancelling the licenses. For example, Texas has issued cancellations effective immediately.
On the other hand, California has issued letters with a 60-day cancellation timeline. California was also recently sued by several organizations that argued that California must correct any administrative errors in the licenses (such as incorrect expiration dates) rather than cancel the licenses. Because of this lawsuit, California notified drivers that licenses will be extended through March 6, 2026.
In response to that action, FMCSA notified California that it did not have authority to extend the cancellation dates, and on January 7, 2026, notified California that it was withholding approximately 160 million dollars in Highway funding beginning in fiscal year 2027. California will likely challenge FMCSA’s action in court. So far, FMCSA has not initiated decertification procedures, but it threatens to do so in the January 7th letter unless California completes additional corrective actions.
You should be assessing whether you currently use non-domiciled drivers. If so, you should be reviewing their licensing status immediately to ensure that their licenses have not been cancelled by the state. States have targeted, among other things, licenses with expiration dates longer than one year and Canadian and Mexican drivers who were not eligible for non-domiciled licenses.
States that are not subject to a non-compliance order may continue to issue non-domiciled licenses. Because the lawsuit challenging the new non-domiciled rule has been stayed, some states have reverted to issuing non-domiciled licenses under the existing rules. Most states that have resumed issuance of non-domiciled licenses, however, have chosen to follow the now-stayed final rule limiting issuance to H2A- Temporary Agricultural Workers, H-2B- Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers, and E2- Treaty Investors.
Because these issues are in flux and states are responding to these actions in various fashions, you should immediately assess your exposure and identify an action plan for these drivers to assess their fitness to continue to operate.
Feel free to reach out to Sue Lawless, Chris Eckhart, Tim Wiseman, or Brigitte Collier for more information or to discuss your issues.
News from Scopelitis is intended as a report to our clients and friends on developments affecting the transportation industry. The published material does not constitute an exhaustive legal study and should not be regarded or relied upon as individual legal advice or opinion.
IMPORTANT — Non-Domiciled License Update
FMCSA has now issued preliminary determination of non-compliance letters to 18 states:
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- District of Columbia
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Maine
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- New York
- North Dakota
- Oklahoma
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Texas
- Vermont
- Washington
It is likely that any state in substantial non-compliance will be instructed by FMCSA to cancel non-compliant licenses, and if they have not already done so, will be sending cancellation letters to affected drivers. States have taken varying approaches to the timing of cancelling the licenses. For example, Texas has issued cancellations effective immediately.
On the other hand, California has issued letters with a 60-day cancellation timeline. California was also recently sued by several organizations that argued that California must correct any administrative errors in the licenses (such as incorrect expiration dates) rather than cancel the licenses. Because of this lawsuit, California notified drivers that licenses will be extended through March 6, 2026.
In response to that action, FMCSA notified California that it did not have authority to extend the cancellation dates, and on January 7, 2026, notified California that it was withholding approximately 160 million dollars in Highway funding beginning in fiscal year 2027. California will likely challenge FMCSA’s action in court. So far, FMCSA has not initiated decertification procedures, but it threatens to do so in the January 7th letter unless California completes additional corrective actions.
You should be assessing whether you currently use non-domiciled drivers. If so, you should be reviewing their licensing status immediately to ensure that their licenses have not been cancelled by the state. States have targeted, among other things, licenses with expiration dates longer than one year and Canadian and Mexican drivers who were not eligible for non-domiciled licenses.
States that are not subject to a non-compliance order may continue to issue non-domiciled licenses. Because the lawsuit challenging the new non-domiciled rule has been stayed, some states have reverted to issuing non-domiciled licenses under the existing rules. Most states that have resumed issuance of non-domiciled licenses, however, have chosen to follow the now-stayed final rule limiting issuance to H2A- Temporary Agricultural Workers, H-2B- Temporary Non-Agricultural Workers, and E2- Treaty Investors.
Because these issues are in flux and states are responding to these actions in various fashions, you should immediately assess your exposure and identify an action plan for these drivers to assess their fitness to continue to operate.
Feel free to reach out to Sue Lawless, Chris Eckhart, Tim Wiseman, or Brigitte Collier for more information or to discuss your issues.
News from Scopelitis is intended as a report to our clients and friends on developments affecting the transportation industry. The published material does not constitute an exhaustive legal study and should not be regarded or relied upon as individual legal advice or opinion.