Montgomery v. Caribe Transport FAQ
Plain-English answers to the most common questions about the Supreme Court's May 14, 2026 unanimous ruling and what it changed for freight brokers.
What is Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II?
A 2026 US Supreme Court case holding unanimously that the federal FAAAA statute does not preempt state-law negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers. The case arose from a fatal December 2017 Illinois Interstate 70 crash involving a load arranged by broker C.H. Robinson.
When was the ruling issued?
May 14, 2026. The decision was unanimous (9-0), with Justice Amy Coney Barrett writing the opinion. The case docket is 24-1238 in the US Supreme Court.
What is FAAAA and what did it do for brokers?
The Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 broadly preempted state laws related to a freight broker's prices, routes, or services. For decades brokers used FAAAA preemption to dismiss state-law negligent-hiring claims at the pleading stage before discovery. That defense is now closed for this category of claim.
What exactly did the Supreme Court rule?
That state-law negligent-hiring claims against freight brokers fall within the FAAAA's safety-regulation exception. The exception preserves state authority to regulate safety with respect to motor vehicles. The court held that allowing such claims encourages brokers to select safer carriers, which is a legitimate state safety interest.
Did the Supreme Court hold that the broker in Montgomery was actually liable?
No. The Supreme Court only ruled on the FAAAA preemption question. The negligent-hiring claim now proceeds in state court on the merits, where a jury will eventually decide whether C.H. Robinson exercised reasonable care selecting the carrier. The Supreme Court took no position on the underlying liability question.
Does Montgomery apply to all freight brokers?
Yes. The ruling is binding on all US courts and applies to negligent-hiring claims against any freight broker in any state. Brokers operating across state lines face exposure in any state where a crash occurs or where a plaintiff has jurisdictional contacts.
How does this change broker operations?
The vetting workflow itself does not change. The documentation standard does. Brokers now need to capture, lock, and retain a per-load record of FMCSA safety rating, CSA scores, insurance currency, and operating authority at the moment of booking. The record is what plaintiff's counsel asks for in discovery and what defense counsel introduces at trial.
Will Congress restore FAAAA preemption legislatively?
Unlikely in the near term. Restoring broker preemption would require federal legislation, would face opposition from plaintiff's bar and consumer-safety advocates, and is not on either party's announced agenda. Brokers should plan for the post-Montgomery legal landscape as permanent.
Are there cases pending against brokers right now?
Yes. Plaintiff's lawyers were filing negligent-hiring claims before Montgomery anticipating the outcome. Post-ruling, the plaintiff bar is moving aggressively. The first major wave of post-Montgomery filings is expected in the months following the May 14 decision.
Does the ruling affect motor carriers as well?
Indirectly. Motor carriers were already subject to state-law negligent-hiring claims (about their drivers); the FAAAA preemption defense was a broker-specific shield. For carriers, the legal exposure is unchanged. For brokers, the exposure category is new.
Should I get insurance immediately?
Yes if you are an active broker without contingent auto liability coverage. The insurance market is repricing post Montgomery; the longer you wait, the harder and more expensive coverage becomes. Call your insurance broker immediately.
What about brokers operating in multiple states?
The exposure follows the load. A broker based in Iowa who arranges a load involved in a crash in California can be sued in California state court. Multi-state brokers should expect to defend in whatever state the crash occurs and the plaintiff has standing to sue.