FMCSA’s New Rule on Non-Domiciled CDLs Changes CDL Eligibility for roughly 200,000 drivers.
FMCSA’s final rule effective March 16, 2026, upends CDL eligibility requirements for current non-domiciled CDL drivers. The final rule is virtually identical to the previous interim final rule and limits eligibility for non-domiciled CDLs to H-2A, H-2B, and E-2 Visa holders. Non-domiciled CDLs remain valid until the next licensing action, e.g., upgrade or renewal.
Several groups including local governments, Teamsters California and the AFL-CIO, immediately challenged the rule in the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and requested an emergency stay. The court has not yet ruled on the request for stay and recently challengers also asked the Court to accelerate the briefing schedule.
Unless a stay is granted or the rule is overturned by the Court, states must follow it. Likely it will take time for states to modify their systems and train personnel to accommodate the new rule. Until they do, states cannot issue any non-domiciled CDL. And the 25 jurisdictions subject to a non-compliance letter cannot issue any non-domiciled CDL until FMCSA says they can.
Before changing your hiring practices weigh all risks carefully including the risk of employment litigation. Because the rule specifically allows drivers holding properly issued non-domiciled CDLs to operate until their license expires, those drivers are qualified under the federal regulations.
Acting against drivers based solely on a future risk they may not be able to renew their licenses could be viewed as discriminatory. At least one discrimination lawsuit has been filed arising from treatment of non-domiciled drivers. To avoid similar claims, focus on whether your drivers currently meet all federal and company safety requirements.
A quarterly newsletter of legal news for the clients and friends of Scopelitis, Garvin, Light, Hanson & Feary
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.
FMCSA’s New Rule on Non-Domiciled CDLs Changes CDL Eligibility for roughly 200,000 drivers.
FMCSA’s final rule effective March 16, 2026, upends CDL eligibility requirements for current non-domiciled CDL drivers. The final rule is virtually identical to the previous interim final rule and limits eligibility for non-domiciled CDLs to H-2A, H-2B, and E-2 Visa holders. Non-domiciled CDLs remain valid until the next licensing action, e.g., upgrade or renewal.
Several groups including local governments, Teamsters California and the AFL-CIO, immediately challenged the rule in the federal D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals and requested an emergency stay. The court has not yet ruled on the request for stay and recently challengers also asked the Court to accelerate the briefing schedule.
Unless a stay is granted or the rule is overturned by the Court, states must follow it. Likely it will take time for states to modify their systems and train personnel to accommodate the new rule. Until they do, states cannot issue any non-domiciled CDL. And the 25 jurisdictions subject to a non-compliance letter cannot issue any non-domiciled CDL until FMCSA says they can.
Before changing your hiring practices weigh all risks carefully including the risk of employment litigation. Because the rule specifically allows drivers holding properly issued non-domiciled CDLs to operate until their license expires, those drivers are qualified under the federal regulations.
Acting against drivers based solely on a future risk they may not be able to renew their licenses could be viewed as discriminatory. At least one discrimination lawsuit has been filed arising from treatment of non-domiciled drivers. To avoid similar claims, focus on whether your drivers currently meet all federal and company safety requirements.
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.