A federal appeals court has temporarily stopped the Trump administration’s rule that sought to restrict undocumented immigrants and non-citizens from obtaining Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued the decision on Monday. Two Democrat-appointed judges voted to pause the rule, while one Republican-appointed judge dissented.
What the Rule Proposed
Introduced in September by Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, the regulation required non-citizen CDL applicants to prove their immigration status and hold a valid work visa.
Federal officials said the change was intended to improve road safety and prevent states from issuing CDLs to drivers without verified legal status or sufficient English proficiency.
However, critics say the rule unfairly targeted immigrant communities and could have disrupted livelihoods for many lawful residents working in the trucking industry.
Safety Concerns Behind the Policy
The administration pointed to several tragic accidents involving unverified drivers to justify the rule. Federal data showed that states such as California, Texas, and Pennsylvania had issued a significant number of non-compliant CDLs.
Two major accidents — one in Florida and another in California — involved drivers who were reportedly in the country without authorization, leading to multiple fatalities.
Officials argued these incidents underscored the need for stronger verification systems to keep all motorists safe.
Criticism and Legal Pushback
Labor unions and advocacy groups voiced strong opposition.
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, called the measure “spiteful and unlawful,” saying it targeted immigrants who contribute to essential industries like transportation.
Legal challenges filed in October argued that the administration did not follow proper rulemaking procedures, prompting the court to issue a stay for further review.
Next Steps and Broader Implications
With the rule on hold, the Trump administration has pledged to appeal the decision and continue defending its policy. Supporters claim the measure is about public safety, while critics see it as part of a broader effort to restrict immigrant participation in key U.S. industries.
The case highlights an ongoing debate between immigration enforcement and economic inclusion — and how to ensure road safety while respecting the rights of all workers.
As the courts deliberate, both federal and state agencies continue monitoring compliance to keep U.S. highways safe for everyone
About The Author
