C.H. Robinson is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to keep one national set of rules for freight brokers, arguing that different state laws would hurt safety, raise costs, and create confusion across supply chains.
What’s Related
Earlier this week, the Minnesota-based logistics provider filed a merits brief in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, a case that will decide whether freight brokers can be held liable under state laws for accidents involving federally licensed motor carriers. The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments on March 4, 2026.
At the center of the case is whether federal law preempts state-level claims seeking to hold brokers responsible for their carrier selection. C.H. Robinson argues that for nearly a century, freight transportation has operated under a single federal framework designed to keep goods moving safely and consistently across state lines.
“For nearly a century, federal law has provided one clear set of rules for how freight moves across the country. That clarity matters for safety and for the economy,” said Dorothy Capers, Chief Legal Officer at C.H. Robinson. “Our brief asks the Court to reaffirm that framework so responsibilities remain where they belong—and goods keep moving reliably for families and businesses nationwide.”
The company says brokers do not own trucks, employ drivers, or control day-to-day driving decisions. Under federal rules, those responsibilities rest with motor carriers, which are licensed and regulated at the national level. Allowing state courts to impose different standards, Robinson argues, would blur those lines and shift responsibility away from the parties actually operating vehicles.
“Permitting 50 different state court systems and precedents to impose their own standards on the selection of federally licensed motor carriers would fragment a system built for consistency, create conflicting rules for the same shipment, and increase costs and uncertainty across the supply chains that keep goods moving nationwide,” Capers added. “A unified federal framework not only reduces confusion—it helps ensure that safety oversight remains focused and effective where it matters most.”
The case also marks the first time the Supreme Court will directly address whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 applies to state tort claims against freight brokers. While the law’s name references aviation, it also governs trucking and brokerage services and limits when states can regulate those activities.
Insiders say the outcome could bring clarity to a legal landscape that has grown increasingly uneven, with courts reaching different conclusions in similar cases. A ruling in favor of federal preemption would provide more certainty for brokers, carriers, and shippers that operate across state lines.
