The Florida Senate Transportation Committee voted 6-3 on Tuesday to advance Senate Bill 86, legislation that would require law enforcement to detain commercial truck drivers found to be in the country illegally, impound their vehicles, fine owners $50,000, and ban the motor carrier from operating in the state. The bill passed along party lines with zero debate in the committee room.

This isn’t an isolated action. It’s the tip of a spear that’s now aimed at CDL programs across the country, and if you’re a fleet manager, safety director, or owner-operator who hasn’t been paying attention to what’s happening at the state level, you’re about to get a very expensive education.

The legislative momentum stems directly from a crash on the Florida Turnpike last August. A driver named Harjinder Singh attempted an illegal U-turn with his semi-truck, placing the rig directly in the path of a minivan. Three people died. Investigators subsequently learned Singh had entered the country illegally in 2018 before obtaining his CDL in California. Post-crash testing revealed he failed an English-language proficiency evaluation.

That crash set off a chain reaction that’s still reverberating through state capitols and the halls of DOT.

Florida Senate President Don Gaetz made the incident the centerpiece of SB 86. His position is straightforward: the bill targets not just the driver, but the carriers who put unqualified operators behind the wheel. “I’m mad at the motor carriers who would hire him,” Gaetz said. “I’m mad at the people who would put their loads in carriers and not do the due diligence to know they’ve got an illegal driving the truck.”

The bill requires drivers to be lawfully present, hold a valid CDL, understand and read English, follow road signs and laws, and communicate with law enforcement. Violations trigger immediate detention and transfer to ICE, vehicle impoundment, a $50,000 civil penalty, and a ban on the carrier’s operations in Florida until it comes into compliance.

The bill now heads to its next committee stop. If it passes and gets signed by Governor DeSantis, it takes effect July 1, 2026.

Florida isn’t operating in a vacuum. Across the country, state legislatures are rushing to fill what they perceive as a federal enforcement gap, and the legislation is remarkably similar in structure and intent.

Oklahoma has been the most aggressive in enforcement. In late September 2025, “Operation Guardian” saw ICE and the Oklahoma Highway Patrol arrest 130 commercial truck drivers along Interstate 40 in a three-day blitz at the Beckham County Port of Entry. The drivers came from at least nine countries, including India, Uzbekistan, China, Russia, Georgia, Turkey, Tajikistan, Ukraine, and Mauritania. Many held CDLs issued by what Oklahoma officials called “sanctuary states.”

Governor Kevin Stitt released a photo of what appeared to be a New York-issued CDL with “No Name Given” listed as the driver’s legal name. “If New York wants to hand out CDLs to illegal immigrants with ‘No Name Given,’ that’s on them,” Stitt said. “The moment they cross into Oklahoma, they answer to our laws.”

Oklahoma followed up with another operation in late October that resulted in 70 additional arrests, including 26 drivers holding CDLs issued by California, Illinois, and New York. Eight additional drivers were operating commercial vehicles without a CDL.

Now, Oklahoma has multiple bills in play. HB3563 mirrors Florida’s approach, including custody, ICE transfer, impoundment, a $50,000 fine, and a carrier ban. SB1222 would prohibit holders of certain non-domiciled CDLs from operating in the state entirely. SB20, originally an ATV bill, was gutted and replaced with language targeting English proficiency and non-domiciled CDLs. It would also prohibit truckers with B-1 or B-2 visas from operating in the state, with fines of up to $5,000 for carriers that employ them.

Arizona has HB2345, which makes it a felony to possess or use a fake CDL and authorizes vehicle seizure and forfeiture. If an employer knowingly allows an unauthorized person to drive, the truck can be sold at auction. SB1511 would ban anyone from operating a commercial vehicle in the state without proof of legal presence.

Kentucky has legislation filed by Representative John Hodgson that would make it illegal for an unlawfully present person to apply for a job. It would also require CDLs to clearly mark whether the holder is a U.S. citizen or a legally present non-citizen.

Tennessee has HB1706/SB1587, which would make it a Class A misdemeanor for a person unlawfully present in the U.S. to operate a CMV. The state is simultaneously requiring thousands of truck drivers to appear in person to prove citizenship or legal permanent residency. Employers who knowingly allow unauthorized drivers to operate could face civil liability if accidents occur. State officials who issued CDLs improperly could also face liability.

Illinois has HB4184, which would block non-U.S. citizens from obtaining or renewing a driver’s license or permit, and specifically prohibits lawful permanent residents and foreign-domiciled persons from obtaining a commercial learner’s permit.

Arkansas recently enacted English proficiency requirements for CDL holders. The governor signed HB1745 into law in April 2025.

The pattern is clear: states aren’t waiting for federal action to sort itself out. They’re building their own enforcement mechanisms.

This state-level activity comes amid unprecedented federal enforcement action.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced an emergency interim final rule in September 2025 that would have eliminated EAD-based eligibility for non-domiciled CDLs, limiting them to holders of H-2A, H-2B, and E-2 visas only. FMCSA estimated that the rule would push approximately 194,000 drivers out of the market, roughly 97% of the nearly 200,000 non-domiciled CDL holders nationwide.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals stayed that rule in November 2025, meaning the new restrictions aren’t currently in effect. But the stay didn’t stop FMCSA’s state-level enforcement actions, which have been devastating.

California has lost $160 million in federal highway funding for failing to revoke over 17,000 improperly issued non-domiciled CDLs by the January 5 deadline. An additional $40 million was withheld earlier for refusing to enforce English Language Proficiency requirements. That’s $200 million gone from one state in less than three months.

North Carolina is now staring down a $50 million funding cut after FMCSA’s audit found 54% of sampled non-domiciled CDLs were issued illegally, licenses extending beyond lawful presence, licenses issued to Mexican nationals ineligible under existing rules, and licenses issued without verifying lawful presence at all.

FMCSA has issued preliminary determinations of non-compliance to 19 states so far. Colorado, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, Minnesota, and New York have all been warned they’re at risk of funding losses. Multiple states have voluntarily paused the issuance of non-domiciled CDLs while they sort out their compliance status.

The federal hammer isn’t just funding cuts. Under 49 U.S.C. § 31312 and 49 CFR 384.405, FMCSA has the authority to fully decertify a state’s CDL program if it’s found in substantial noncompliance. Decertification would prohibit the state from issuing, renewing, transferring, or upgrading any commercial learner’s permits or CDLs, not just non-domiciled credentials, but every single one.

The non-domiciled CDL exists because of a regulatory accommodation dating back to 1988. The Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986 required state agencies to issue CDLs only to drivers domiciled in that state. The Nonresident CDL exception (renamed Non-Domiciled CDL in 2011) allowed states to issue credentials to immigrants and nonresidents who met licensing requirements.

In most states, CDLs issued to domiciled applicants require proof of citizenship or lawful permanent residence. That made non-domiciled CDLs the only pathway for noncitizen workers with Employment Authorization Documents, including DACA recipients, TPS holders, asylees, refugees, and humanitarian parolees.

All but seven states currently issue non-domiciled CDLs. New Hampshire, Rhode Island, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama do not.

The problem FMCSA identified isn’t the existence of non-domiciled CDLs. It’s that states were issuing them without standardization: some matched the standard five to eight-year validity, some matched legal presence expiration, and some matched EAD expiration. When those dates don’t align (which they often don’t for TPS and DACA recipients), drivers could end up holding CDLs that are valid for years beyond their documented status.

In California, the FMCSA audit found that CDLs were issued up to 4 years after the required lawful presence documentation. In one case, a driver from Brazil received a CDL with endorsements to operate passenger buses and school buses that remained valid months after his legal presence expired.

Federal law at 49 CFR § 391.11(b)(2) has required CDL holders to read and speak English sufficiently to understand highway signs, respond to official inquiries, and make entries on reports and records for decades. But enforcement was essentially non-existent until Secretary Duffy made it a priority last May.

If you’re a motor carrier operating interstate, you now need to understand that your exposure varies dramatically by state. A driver who’s compliant in California might face arrest in Oklahoma. A carrier doing business in Florida after July 1, 2026, could see equipment impounded and face $50,000 fines for a driver who passed muster in New York.

The practical implications are:

Audit your driver pool immediately. Know which of your drivers hold non-domiciled CDLs, what their underlying documentation looks like, and when it expires. If you’re running loads through states with aggressive enforcement postures, you need to know whether those drivers can legally operate there.

Understand your routes. Oklahoma is actively targeting I-40. Texas, Arizona, and Florida are all implementing or considering enhanced enforcement. If your lanes take drivers through these states, factor that into your risk assessment.

Document everything. The carriers who survive this enforcement wave will be those that can demonstrate they conducted due diligence on driver qualifications. That means more than an I-9 in a folder; it means active verification and monitoring.

Watch for cascading state action. What Florida passed today, other states will consider tomorrow. Georgia, South Carolina, Louisiana, and other states with conservative legislatures and significant truck traffic are likely to follow suit.

For drivers, the message is simpler and harsher: if your CDL status is in question, operating in certain states now carries the risk of detention and deportation. The federal rule may be stayed, but state enforcement isn’t.

The trucking industry has relied on immigrant labor to address chronic driver shortages. By some estimates, 18% of truckers are foreign-born. An estimated 150,000 Sikh drivers alone work in the American trucking industry. Refugees account for approximately 1.2% of truck drivers in Texas; DACA-eligible individuals account for another 1.1%.

The policy debate over whether these restrictions make sense from a safety, economic, or humanitarian standpoint will continue. What won’t wait is the enforcement reality.

Florida’s SB 86 passed the committee yesterday. It’ll be on the Governor’s desk within weeks. Oklahoma has already demonstrated what aggressive roadside enforcement looks like. And the FMCSA has shown it’s willing to allocate hundreds of millions in funding to enforce compliance.

Responsible States are already acting. The question is whether carriers and drivers will be ready when the enforcement arrives at their door or their port of entry

The post Florida Takes Shot Across The Bow As State-Level War on Immigrant Truck Drivers Kicks Off appeared first on FreightWaves.