The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) recently ruled on two high profile trucking cases.

The first was Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC involving a 2017 truck accident in which a truck operated by Caribe Transport struck Mr. Montgomery’s tractor trailer while parked on the side of the road. As a result of the accident, Mr. Montgomery suffered an injury and had one leg amputated. CH Robinson was brought into the lawsuit under the claim they were negligent in hiring when they brokered the load to Caribe. CH Robinson argued they were exempt from neglect hiring as brokers are preempted by federal law. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court.

In a 9-0 decision, the SCOTUS determined while states cannot interfere with rates, routes and services of interstate commerce, there is a “safety exception” requiring parties to exercise reasonable care in hiring practices. In the majority’s decision, Justice Coney Barrett wrote, “The safety exception saves only a subset of preempted claims: those involving regulations concerning motor vehicle safety. State laws related to motor carrier prices, rates, and services that have no relationships to safety remain preempted.”

The case has been remanded to the lower court to determine if CH Robinson is guilty of negligent hiring.

While most brokers use all the electronic (and paper) tools currently available to vet motor carriers, there is a subset that does not.

The second case was Brock v. Flowers Foods involving whether a last-mile driver of an interstate move, but who never leaves the state, is an interstate or intrastate driver. Again in a 9-0 ruling, the SCOTUS ruled the driver is involved in interstate commerce as the goods originated from or were destined to a place outside the driver’s portion of the move. When deciding whether the move is interstate or intrastate, it is the goods that take precedence over the driver.

This ruling reaffirms 150 years of precedent, and while Brock was not a case involving intermodal trucking, it confirms the movement of ocean or rail containers to or from marine or rail facilities is considered interstate commerce, and the drivers that move them are interstate drivers.

Latest News

PAY DAY FOR PORTS

Our ports are gaining long sought-after and much needed influence and attention at the national level. The US Department of Transportation's Maritime Administration (MARAD) recently awarded $774 million in port infrastructure grants. There is an additional $488.6...

NUCLEAR OPTION

Speaking of the Maritime Administration (MARAD), they initiated a Request for Information (RFI) soliciting input from industry stakeholders, ship builders and operators and technology companies to determine how small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) can be integrated...

BARK TURNS TO BITE

Last month, the US Senate confirmed Robert Harvey as the newest Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) commissioner. Mr. Harvey fills the fifth and final seat on the FMC. The FMC is gaining prominence and proving they do not mind following up a bark with a bite. They...

CAPITOL TAKES ON CRIME

At long last, the federal government is taking cargo crimes seriously. The Combating Organized Retail Crime Act (CORCA) passed the US House last month. CORCA focuses on investigating and prosecuting organized cargo theft rings. The Building Unrivaled Infrastructure...

TARIFF RECAP

Refunds for IEEPA tariffs are reportedly flowing back to cargo interests. IEEPA's replacement, Section 122 tariffs (trade imbalance), were invalidated by the Court of International Trade as they did not meet the necessary criteria. The ruling is on pause while being...

Share This