C.H. Robinson Lawsuit: Supreme Court Ruling on Broker Preemption

In May 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 9-0 that freight broker C.H. Robinson can be sued under state negligence law for hiring an unsafe trucking company, ending the federal preemption defense the brokerage industry had relied on for years. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the C.H. Robinson lawsuit, Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, means brokers across the country can now face negligent-hiring claims when a carrier they selected causes a crash.¹

The Crash Behind the Case

On December 7, 2017, truck driver Shawn Montgomery pulled to the side of Interstate 70 in Illinois with a mechanical problem. Another truck, driven by Yosniel Varela-Mojena for Caribe Transport II, veered off the road and rear-ended him. Montgomery lost a leg and suffered permanent disfigurement.²

The load Varela-Mojena was hauling had been arranged by C.H. Robinson, which connects shippers with carriers but does not own trucks. Montgomery sued the broker for negligent hiring, arguing it knew or should have known Caribe Transport II was unsafe. At the time of the crash, the carrier held only a “conditional” safety rating from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and had been found deficient on driver qualifications, hours of service, vehicle maintenance, and crash rates. Its out-of-service rates for drivers and vehicles were reportedly twice the national average.³

The Preemption Question

C.H. Robinson’s defense rested on the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994, or FAAAA. Despite its name, the statute governs interstate trucking and brokerage. It bars states from enforcing laws “related to a price, route, or service” of a motor carrier or broker, but it also preserves state authority to regulate safety “with respect to motor vehicles.”

Whether a negligence claim against a broker for picking a dangerous carrier fell inside that safety exception had split the federal appeals courts. The Ninth Circuit had allowed such claims to proceed; the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits had blocked them, calling broker-hiring decisions “one step removed” from motor vehicles. Montgomery’s case came out of the Seventh Circuit, which had dismissed his claim on preemption grounds in January 2025.⁴ The Supreme Court took the case to resolve the split.

What the Supreme Court Held

On May 14, 2026, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for a unanimous Court, held that negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers are not preempted by the FAAAA. They fall within the statute’s safety exception.¹

The Court read “with respect to motor vehicles” to mean “concerning” or “regarding” the vehicles used in transportation. Because a negligent-hiring claim requires asking whether the broker exercised reasonable care in choosing the trucking company that would carry the goods, the claim “concerns” the trucks involved. Barrett wrote that requiring C.H. Robinson to exercise ordinary care in selecting a carrier concerns motor vehicles, placing Montgomery’s claim squarely within the safety exception.⁵

The opinion also noted that federal law contains no comprehensive safety standards for broker hiring, focusing instead on financial requirements. That gap reinforced the conclusion that Congress did not intend the FAAAA to fully shield brokers from state safety regulation. The Court reversed the Seventh Circuit and sent Montgomery’s case back for further proceedings.

Kavanaugh’s Limits

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, wrote separately to call the case “close” and to answer the freight industry’s concerns. Brokers will not “routinely be subject to state tort liability,” he wrote. They can defend themselves by showing they acted reasonably, hired reputable carriers, asked the right questions, and confirmed those carriers had sound safety policies. The proximate-cause requirement in state tort law adds another check. Brokers who believe the result is unfair, Kavanaugh added, can “ask Congress and the President to change federal law.”⁶

How C.H. Robinson Responded

C.H. Robinson said it was disappointed but respected the ruling. Chief Legal Officer Dorothy Capers said the company would “continue to operate responsibly, support stronger federal enforcement, and work constructively with regulators, carriers, and customers to strengthen the national safety system.”⁷

Within weeks, the company tightened its carrier standards. It began notifying carriers whose FMCSA safety scores exceeded internal thresholds that they were being moved to “non-certified status” and could no longer book new loads through the Navisphere portal. Loads already in transit continued to be delivered and paid normally.⁸ The company also raised its minimum insurance requirement from the federal floor of $750,000 to $1 million, stopped working with carriers holding a “Conditional” safety rating, and imposed a seven-day waiting period for newly authorized carriers. It said the affected carriers represented less than one percent of its annual North American truckload volume.⁹

What the Ruling Means for the Industry

Every freight broker now faces potential negligence litigation in every state if it fails to exercise reasonable care in choosing carriers. The preemption defense that had worked in the Seventh and Eleventh Circuits is gone.¹⁰

Insurance costs are expected to rise. Industry observers have described the decision as an “underwriting event” that will push up premiums for contingent freight broker liability coverage. Brokers will need to document their vetting processes to satisfy underwriters and defend future claims, and the added costs, along with spending on collision-mitigation systems and onboard cameras, are expected to reach shippers and ultimately consumers.¹⁰ Shipping customers may also push more liability onto brokers through revised master service agreements.¹¹

Small carriers are feeling the effects most sharply. Owner-operators have reported being dropped from C.H. Robinson’s network because of FMCSA safety scores or because they lack a formal safety rating. The Government Accountability Office has noted that the FMCSA’s Safety Measurement System scores tend to be less precise for smaller carriers, since a smaller sample of inspections can produce artificially high or low scores. The Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association has said the underlying data system is flawed and needs a major overhaul.⁹ Analysts expect the tightening to accelerate consolidation, giving larger carriers with documented safety programs an edge.¹⁰

Not all reactions have been negative. Some small-fleet owners have called the decision an overdue correction that forces brokers to share the risk of the carriers they choose rather than profiting from the arrangement without bearing the safety consequences.¹⁰

Where Things Go From Here

Montgomery’s case returns to the Seventh Circuit. The Supreme Court settled the preemption question, but Montgomery still has to prove his negligence claim on the merits. No settlement has been publicly reported.¹²

One boundary is worth noting: the ruling interprets the interstate side of the FAAAA, which contains the safety exception. A separate provision governs intrastate broker activity and lacks that same exception, an oddity the Court acknowledged but did not resolve. C.H. Robinson has urged Congress to pass “Dalilah’s Law,” legislation focused on English proficiency requirements and other safeguards for commercial driver’s licenses.⁷ As of mid-2026, no federal legislation had been introduced to codify or limit broker liability in response to the ruling, and the FAAAA remains silent on whether brokers should carry the same minimum insurance as motor carriers. Because the standard of reasonable care is now left to state courts, the industry expects it to be interpreted differently across the states as new cases are filed.¹²

1
Supreme Court of the United States. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, No. 24-1238
2
SCOTUSblog. Court Rules Freight Brokers Can Face Negligent Hiring Suits Under State Law
3
Supreme Court of the United States. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, Joint Appendix
4
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, No. 24-1192
5
Cornell Law Institute. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC
6
Supreme Court of the United States. Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, No. 24-1238 – Section: Kavanaugh Concurrence
7
C.H. Robinson Worldwide. C.H. Robinson Responds to Supreme Court Decision and Reinforces Support for Strong Federal Safety Oversight
8
Yahoo Finance. C.H. Robinson Removing Carriers
9
Landline Media. C.H. Robinson Tightens Carrier Standards After Supreme Court Loss
10
Trucking Info. Why the Supreme Court Broker Liability Ruling Could Reshape Trucking’s Safety Landscape
11
Lockton. A Highway Crash and a Supreme Court Decision Lead to Higher Risks for Freight Brokers
12
Trucking Dive. Supreme Court Decision Raises Stakes for Broker Hiring Practices