We Don’t Need New CDL Laws—We Need the Backbone to Enforce the Ones We Already Have

A collaboration between Lewis McLain & AI

America has a highway safety crisis, but it isn’t caused by a lack of laws. It’s caused by a lack of courage. While headlines scream about undocumented immigrants receiving Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs) or truckers who can’t read English road signs, the uncomfortable truth is that every single rule we need to prevent these problems already exists—and has existed for years. The real failure is in the people and institutions tasked with enforcing those rules, who have too often chosen expediency, politics, or economic pressure over public safety.

Start with the most basic requirement in federal commercial driving law: English proficiency. Since 1991, federal regulations have mandated that every CDL holder must be able to read and speak English well enough to understand road signs, converse with officers, follow written instructions, and complete logbooks. These are not cosmetic skills. If a driver cannot read “Bridge Out,” “Hazmat Detour,” or “Runaway Truck Ramp,” the consequences can be fatal. Yet for years, federal guidance actually discouraged inspectors from taking unqualified drivers off the road, treating English-language deficiencies as minor administrative issues rather than serious safety violations. A rule that should have been enforced with zero tolerance was instead enforced with zero urgency.

Then there is the issue of immigration status. Federal law requires lawful presence for the issuance of a CDL. It always has. And after several fatal crashes involving non-domiciled CDL holders, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) tightened the rule in 2025 to shut down state-level abuses. But even before the new rule, states were supposed to verify immigration status. That is the job. Too many simply didn’t do it. California and Washington issued CDLs to Harjinder Singh, a man who crossed the border illegally, failed his English and road-sign tests repeatedly, and yet was somehow certified to drive an 80,000-pound truck. His illegal U-turn in Florida killed three people. That tragedy didn’t happen because the law was unclear. It happened because states ignored it.

And then there is the corruption problem—something no law can fix unless officials are held accountable for enforcing it. Across multiple states, examiners have pleaded guilty to taking cash in exchange for fraudulent passing scores on CDL tests. Some applicants never took the test at all. Others failed repeatedly but were “passed” anyway through bribery or manipulation. If we are handing out CDLs like raffle tickets, what does it matter what the regulations say? A safety system that tolerates fraud is already broken, regardless of what Congress writes.

The point is unavoidable: the regulatory architecture for commercial driving in America is not weak. It is one of the strongest safety frameworks in federal law. What’s weak is the follow-through. It is the oversight. It is the accountability. It is, in short, the will.

And here is where the real reform must happen.

The only meaningful legal fix—the only one that would actually change behavior—would be to attach severe, unavoidable, personal consequences to state officials who knowingly fail to enforce CDL laws. That means:

  • Stiff financial penalties for agency heads who allow unlawful CDL issuance
  • Mandatory termination for supervisors who ignore federal eligibility rules
  • Felony criminal liability for any state official who knowingly approves or enables licenses for applicants who cannot meet federal requirements

We criminalize the examiner who takes the bribe. Why do we not criminalize the bureaucratic indifference that enables widespread safety violations? If a state official signs off on a CDL for someone who cannot lawfully hold it—or cannot read English—and that driver later kills someone, why should the public absorb that harm while the official shrugs and moves on?

We impose strict liability on trucking companies for safety failures. Why not impose strict liability on the regulators who are paid to protect the public?

Until state officials have real skin in the game, the pattern will continue: dangerous drivers slipping through, honest examiners overshadowed by corrupt ones, and families destroyed by tragedies that were not accidents at all—just the final link in a chain of deliberate negligence.

America’s highways do not need new statutes, new committees, new task forces, or new pilot programs. We do not need years of study or incremental policy tweaks. We already know what the law says. We already know why those laws exist. We already know what happens when they’re not enforced.

What we need—what we have lacked—is backbone.

We need regulators whose careers depend on enforcing the rules they swore to uphold. We need states that fear losing funding not because of political disagreement but because they knowingly put unqualified drivers behind the wheel. We need inspectors empowered to take unsafe drivers off the road immediately, without hesitation. And we need lawmakers who will not flinch from holding public officials legally responsible when their failure to act costs innocent lives.

The United States does not have a CDL law problem.
It has a CDL enforcement problem.
And behind that, a CDL accountability problem.
And behind that, a CDL courage problem.

Three people died in Florida because states lacked the courage to enforce rules that were already written in black and white. How many more lives must be lost before we demand accountability not only from truckers, but from the officials who gave them the keys?

If we want safer highways, the solution is painfully clear:
Enforce the laws we have—and hold the people in charge personally responsible when they don’t.

Appendix A: The National Scope of Non-Domiciled CDL Violations

Recent federal audits conducted by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) show that the improper issuance of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) is not isolated to a single “problem state.” It is a national compliance failure involving multiple State Driver Licensing Agencies (SDLAs) that issued CDLs in violation of federal rules on lawful presence and license expiration. FMCSA+2Federal Register+2

FMCSA’s 2025 Annual Program Reviews and follow-up letters identified at least six states with serious non-domiciled CDL problems: California, Texas, Colorado, South Dakota, Washington, and Pennsylvania. In each of these, federal reviewers found CDLs that remained valid long after the driver’s work authorization had expired, were issued to ineligible applicants, or were classified incorrectly as regular CDLs instead of non-domiciled status. Federal Register+2Land Line Media+2

California

In California, FMCSA’s sampling revealed that roughly 25% of non-domiciled CDLs were improperly issued, including licenses that extended up to four years beyond the holder’s authorized employment period. CRMCA+1 The state’s own internal review ultimately identified approximately 17,000 non-domiciled CDLs that “no longer meet federal requirements,” which the U.S. Department of Transportation has ordered revoked on an accelerated schedule. FMCSA Federal officials have warned California that failure to fully correct the problem could result in the loss of up to $160 million in federal transportation funds. FMCSA+1

Texas

In Texas, FMCSA examined 123 driver records and found 60 non-domiciled CDLs—nearly half—with expiration dates extending far beyond the driver’s lawful U.S. status. Land Line Media+1 The same review uncovered a separate case in which Texas improperly issued a regular CDL (rather than a non-domiciled CDL) to a driver who was ineligible for that status; that driver was later involved in a March 2025 fatal crash that killed five people. Land Line Media+1 Texas has since suspended issuance of non-domiciled CDLs, and all CDLs to certain categories of non-citizens, pending corrective action. Land Line Media

Colorado

Colorado’s audit revealed a mix of policy, procedural, and IT-system failures. Out of 99 sampled records, 6 non-domiciled CDLs had expiration dates later than the driver’s lawful presence. In some cases, database programming did not properly tie CDL expiration to immigration documentation, allowing licenses to “run on” long after work authorization had lapsed. Land Line Media+1

South Dakota

In South Dakota, FMCSA’s review of 51 records discovered three cases where non-domiciled CDLs exceeded the lawful work period and three additional cases in which non-domiciled CDLs were issued to Canadian citizens who were categorically ineligible under the federal rules. One example involved a Canadian citizen who was issued a non-domiciled CDL in June 2025 with a 2029 expiration date despite the state confirming that he was not eligible for that credential. South Dakota has temporarily halted issuance of non-domiciled CDLs while it attempts to repair its processes. Land Line Media+1

Washington

Washington’s problems run deeper into mis-classification. In a sample of 125 records, approximately 10% were non-compliant. The state later identified 685 drivers who should have been issued non-domiciled CDLs but instead received regular CDLs, effectively bypassing the federal lawful-presence controls altogether. FMCSA+2Federal Register+2

Pennsylvania

Pennsylvania is listed by FMCSA as one of “at least five states” whose issuance of non-domiciled CDLs violated federal requirements, although the detailed sampling results have not been fully separated out in public summaries. Federal Register+1 FMCSA has nonetheless classified Pennsylvania as a state with documented non-compliance requiring corrective action, oversight, and potential financial consequences.

Bottom line: FMCSA’s own documents describe these findings as evidence of “acute systemic problems across the country” in how non-domiciled CDLs are issued and renewed. Federal Register+1 That language is not about a policy gap; it is about enforcement and oversight failures in multiple states at once.

Appendix B: Timeline of Key CDL Enforcement and Policy Actions

This appendix provides a brief timeline of major events showing how existing CDL laws have been undercut by weak enforcement—and how federal officials only moved aggressively after multiple fatal crashes.

1991 – English Proficiency Rule Codified

  • FMCSA (then under the broader DOT motor carrier framework) codifies 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2), requiring drivers operating commercial motor vehicles in interstate commerce to be able to read and speak English well enough to understand traffic signs, communicate with the public and officers, and make entries on reports and records.

2017 – “Connor” Crash in Florida

  • In northern Florida, 18-year-old Connor Dzion is killed in a crash involving a tractor-trailer driven by a trucker who, according to later commentary and advocacy, could not read English traffic signs. Congresswoman Harriet Hageman
  • The case becomes a rallying point for the argument that the English rule is not being enforced in practice, despite its long existence on paper.

2016–2020 – Softening of English Enforcement

  • Internal guidance to inspectors and state partners gradually reduces the use of English proficiency as an automatic out-of-service (OOS) condition. Over time, this sends a clear signal that the English rule is “paper only,” not a serious enforcement priority.

2025 (Early) – FMCSA Annual Program Reviews (APRs)

  • FMCSA’s 2025 APRs uncover systemic non-compliance in multiple states, including California, Texas, Colorado, South Dakota, Washington, and Pennsylvania, in how they issue non-domiciled CDLs—especially around lawful presence and expiration dates. FMCSA+2Federal Register+2
  • Since the beginning of 2025, FMCSA identifies at least five fatal crashes involving non-domiciled CDL holders, with at least two involving drivers who were improperly issued CDLs. FMCSA

March 2025 – Texas Fatal Crash

  • FMCSA highlights a March 2025 crash in Texas that kills five people, involving a driver who had been incorrectly given a regular CDL instead of a non-domiciled CDL, in violation of federal eligibility rules. Land Line Media+1

August 12, 2025 – Harjinder Singh Crash in Florida

  • Harjinder Singh, who crossed the border illegally in 2018 and later obtained CDLs in California and Washington, makes an illegal U-turn on Florida’s Turnpike near Fort Pierce, causing a crash that kills three people in a minivan. CDLLife+3Department of Homeland Security+3AP News+3
  • Subsequent reporting reveals Singh failed his CDL tests multiple times, including the English and road-sign portions, and had limited English proficiency—even during a prior roadside stop captured on bodycam. Fox News+2YouTube+2

September 26, 2025 – Emergency Interim Final Rule (IFR)

  • FMCSA issues an emergency interim final rule (IFR) titled “Restoring Integrity to the Issuance of Non-Domiciled Commercial Driver’s Licenses.” FMCSA+2FMCSA+2
  • The IFR sharply restricts the authority of states to issue or renew non-domiciled CDLs, strengthens lawful-status verification, and calls out the improper issuance of thousands of CDLs to ineligible drivers.
  • FMCSA and DOT describe the situation as a nationwide systemic problem, not a few isolated mistakes. Federal Register+1

Late September 2025 – Fact Sheet and Funding Threats

  • DOT publishes a Fact Sheet emphasizing that California alone will need to revoke around 17,000 non-domiciled CDLs, warning that non-compliant states face the loss of significant federal funds. FMCSA+1
  • Concurrently, FMCSA sends letters to several states—Texas, Colorado, South Dakota, and others—ordering corrective action and implicitly tying future federal funding to compliance. Land Line Media+1

October–November 2025 – Court Challenges and Stay

  • A coalition challenges the emergency rule in federal court. In November 2025, the D.C. Circuit issues an administrative stay temporarily blocking the full effect of the IFR while litigation proceeds. FreightWaves+1
  • Trucking groups and some lawmakers begin calling on Congress to codify stricter non-domiciled CDL standards directly in statute if the courts block the emergency rule. CDLLife+1

Takeaway: For more than three decades, the core CDL rules—English proficiency and lawful presence—have existed. Only after multiple fatal crashes, public outrage, and high-profile audits did federal authorities move aggressively to enforce them, and even then, enforcement has now been partially stalled in court. The timeline underlines my point: the system isn’t missing laws; it’s missing consistent enforcement and durable accountability.

Appendix C: Selected Fatal Crashes Involving Non-Domiciled or Non-Proficient CDL Drivers

This appendix summarizes a few of the fatal crashes that illustrate the stakes when states and carriers fail to enforce existing CDL rules.

CaseYear / LocationKey FactorsOutcome
Connor Dzion (Florida)2017 – Northern FloridaTruck driver reportedly could not read English road signs and was driving a commercial vehicle without adequate English proficiency, despite the federal requirement in 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2). Congresswoman Harriet Hageman18-year-old Connor Dzion was killed. The case is now cited in congressional advocacy as proof that weak enforcement of the English rule has life-and-death consequences.
Texas Multi-Fatality CrashMarch 2025 – TexasTexas issued a regular CDL to a driver who should have received a non-domiciled CDL and did not qualify for a regular one under federal rules. Land Line Media+1The driver was involved in a crash that killed five people. FMCSA cites this as a direct consequence of improper issuance and classification of CDLs.
Harjinder Singh Crash (Florida Turnpike)August 12, 2025 – St. Lucie County / Fort Pierce, FloridaHarjinder Singh illegally entered the U.S. in 2018 and later obtained CDLs from California and Washington. He reportedly failed English and road-sign tests multiple times and had limited English proficiency even during prior traffic stops. The Sun+4Department of Homeland Security+4Fox News+4Singh made an illegal U-turn in an official-use-only zone on Florida’s Turnpike, causing a collision that killed three people in a minivan. He is charged with vehicular homicide and immigration violations. The case has triggered lawsuits and intense political conflict over state licensing practices.
Other 2025 Fatal Crashes Involving Non-Domiciled CDLs2025 – multiple states (details redacted in FMCSA documents)FMCSA’s interim final rule notes that at least five fatal crashes in 2025 involved non-domiciled CDL holders, and that at least two of those drivers had been improperly issued CDLs under federal law. FMCSA+1Names and locations for several of these cases have not yet been fully released, but they formed part of the factual basis for the emergency rule restricting non-domiciled CDLs nationwide.

This is not an exhaustive list, but it captures the pattern: every time the rules are treated as suggestions instead of requirements, people die.

**Appendix D: Recommended Legal and Policy Reforms

(With Personal Liability for Officials)**

The core argument of this essay is that we do not need new safety rules; we need to enforce the ones we already have. This appendix outlines reforms that would give those existing rules real teeth—especially by attaching personal consequences to state officials who knowingly fail to enforce them.

Restore Teeth to English Proficiency Enforcement

  1. Make lack of English proficiency an automatic out-of-service (OOS) condition.
    • Direct FMCSA and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) to explicitly classify English-proficiency failures as OOS violations during roadside inspections.
    • Require states to track and report English-related OOS rates annually.
  2. Mandate carrier-level English assessment and documentation.
    • Require carriers to conduct and document a basic English interview at hiring, including simple sign-reading and question-answering exercises, consistent with FMCSA guidance. Congresswoman Harriet Hageman
    • Impose civil penalties on carriers that employ drivers who clearly cannot meet the English requirement.

Lock Down Lawful-Status Verification for CDLs

  1. Tie every CDL issuance to real-time federal immigration verification.
    • Use existing DHS/USCIS databases to verify lawful presence and work authorization at the moment of CDL issuance and renewal.
    • Require automatic revocation when underlying work authorization expires, with short grace periods only for paperwork processing errors.
  2. Ban state-level “workarounds” for non-domiciled CDLs.
    • Codify the core elements of FMCSA’s interim final rule in statute so that no state can revert to earlier, looser interpretations if the IFR is weakened or struck down by courts. FMCSA+2Federal Register+2

Clean Up the Testing and Licensing System

  1. Federal audit and decertification authority over third-party testers.
    • Require periodic, randomized federal audits of third-party CDL examiners and testing sites.
    • Authorize immediate decertification of any site found to falsify test results or accept bribes, with mandatory referral for criminal prosecution.
  2. National test banks and question controls.
    • Use a standardized, English-only national question bank for core CDL exams, with state variation limited to local rules and signage.
    • Encrypt and centrally manage test items so they cannot be leaked or sold.

Personal Liability and Criminal Penalties for State Officials

This is the “biggest legal fix” to emphasize: extremely stiff financial and imprisonment penalties for state officials who knowingly fail to enforce CDL laws. In practice, that could mean:

  1. Statutory “duty to enforce” for state CDL officials.
    • Write federal law explicitly imposing a duty on senior SDLA officials (e.g., DMV directors, licensing division chiefs) to enforce federal eligibility requirements for CDLs, including English proficiency and lawful presence.
  2. Civil fines and loss of position for deliberate non-enforcement.
    • If an audit shows that a state official intentionally instructed staff to ignore federal eligibility rules or systematically overrode lawful-presence or expiration checks, that official should face:
      • Personal civil fines (not paid by the state),
      • Immediate removal from office, and
      • A cooling-off period barring them from holding any public licensing/transportation position.
  3. Felony liability for egregious, knowing violations.
    • Create a narrow but strong federal crime for knowingly approving or allowing issuance of CDLs to ineligible drivers in violation of clearly established federal standards, when such conduct is willful or reckless.
    • Where such misconduct can be linked to a fatal crash, allow prosecutors to charge an enhanced offense (for example, negligent endangerment of the traveling public), subject to due-process protections and proof of causation.
  4. Pension consequences for dereliction of duty.
    • For senior officials found by a clear evidentiary standard to have deliberately ignored federal CDL laws, Congress could authorize partial or full forfeiture of federal-linked retirement benefits. The point is not vengeance; it is to create a personal, financial incentive to take enforcement seriously.

Funding and Transparency Levers

  1. Federal funds at risk for non-compliance.
    • Make explicit—and automatic—the link between SDLA compliance and federal highway/transit funds. If audits show persistent, uncorrected non-compliance, a set percentage of funds is withheld until remedial steps are verified. FMCSA+1
  2. Public grading of state performance.
    • Require DOT to publish an annual “CDL Integrity Scorecard” ranking states on compliance with English proficiency, lawful presence, and non-domiciled CDL rules.
    • Public shaming is not the only tool, but it is a powerful one: no governor wants their state listed as a “bottom five” highway safety risk.

Overall message of Appendix D:
We don’t need new safety standards; we need new stakes. When state officials understand that ignoring CDL law can cost them their job, their pension, their money, and—if egregious enough—their freedom, the culture of “looking the other way” will end very quickly.

Leave a comment