Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Can California issue CDLs to undocumented immigrants without federal approval?
Executive Summary
California currently issues state driver’s licenses to undocumented residents under AB 60, but the ability to issue federally valid Commercial Driver’s Licenses (CDLs) to non-citizens without federal documentation is constrained by a recent Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) rule and related Department of Transportation guidance; states may not freely grant CDLs to undocumented immigrants without meeting new federal verification requirements [1] [2]. Federal emergency rules that took effect in 2025 restrict non-domiciled CDL eligibility to specific visa holders and require documentation and SAVE-system verification, creating a conflict between California’s broader state-issued driver privilege cards and federal CDL eligibility [3] [4].
1. Why a Fatal Crash Sparked a Policy Spotlight and What the White House Claimed
A high-profile fatal crash involving a truck driver reported by national outlets prompted scrutiny of state-issued CDLs, with the White House alleging California issued a CDL to an undocumented driver—an assertion that accelerated federal enforcement attention and prompted the Department of Transportation to act [5]. The White House framing linked state licensing practices to public safety concerns, which the FMCSA used as part of the justification for tightening rules on non-domiciled CDL issuance. The timing of the incident and White House comments in October 2025 shifted policy debate from state autonomy to federal safety standards and enforcement priorities [5] [2].
2. What California’s AB 60 Actually Authorizes and What It Does Not
California’s AB 60 authorizes the DMV to issue driver’s licenses to individuals who cannot prove lawful presence, expanding road safety and access to licensing, but these licenses are limited in scope and are not equivalent to federally recognized credentials for regulated commercial driving tasks [1] [6]. AB 60 licenses help with everyday driving and state identification, but the law does not satisfy federal employment eligibility verification like the I-9, nor does it inherently confer eligibility for federally regulated CDLs without federal-compliant documentation and verification [1] [6].
3. The FMCSA Emergency Rule Changed the Rules for Non-Domiciled CDLs
In September 2025, the FMCSA issued an interim and emergency rule drastically narrowing eligibility for non-domiciled CDLs, limiting such licenses to foreign nationals with H-2A, H-2B, or E-2 visas and requiring an unexpired foreign passport, I-94/I-94A, and SAVE-system verification [2] [3]. This federal action effectively prevents states from issuing federally recognized CDLs to undocumented immigrants lacking those documents, and it led several state DMVs, including California’s, to pause non-domiciled commercial permit issuance to avoid jeopardizing federal safety funding or violating the new rule [4].
4. Clash of Federal Safety Authority versus State Licensing Autonomy
The situation exposes a legal and practical tension: states control driver licensing under state law, but federal statutes and FMCSA regulations govern qualifications for operating in interstate commerce and the standards for CDLs—when federal regulations impose documentary or verification requirements, they limit what state-issued credentials can be used for federal purposes [1] [2]. California can still issue AB 60 licenses for state driving privileges, but the FMCSA rule curtails the practical utility of those licenses for commercial interstate driving absent federal-required documentation and verification [1] [3].
5. Practical Impact: Who Is Affected and What the FMCSA Estimates
The FMCSA estimated the emergency rule affects roughly 200,000 existing non-domiciled CDL holders and 20,000 commercial learner’s permit holders, indicating substantial population-level consequences and immediate administrative impacts for employers and transit agencies that rely on such drivers [3]. Transit agencies and trucking firms now face potential workforce disruptions and compliance burdens as states reconcile AB 60 and other driver privilege programs with the FMCSA’s restrictive documentation demands, prompting DMVs to suspend non-domiciled CLP and CDL issuance while they assess compliance risks [4].
6. Competing Narratives: Safety-First Advocates and Immigrant-Access Advocates
Federal agencies and safety advocates argue the emergency rule restores integrity to CDL issuance and reduces risk by ensuring background and immigration checks tied to documentation [2]. California and immigrant-rights proponents counter that AB 60 improves road safety and inclusion by licensing drivers regardless of immigration status, and they warn that federal constraints could push drivers off the formal system, creating enforcement and equity tensions [1] [6]. The White House’s public statements framed the issue as a safety lapse, which critics view as politically charged given the recent policy changes and state-federal friction [5] [2].
7. What This Means Going Forward: Compliance Choices and Legal Pressure Points
States like California can continue issuing state driver privilege cards under AB 60, but to lawfully issue FMCSA-recognized CDLs, they must meet the new federal documentary and SAVE verification standards—without those federal approvals, CDLs for undocumented immigrants are effectively barred by the FMCSA emergency rule until litigation, regulatory revision, or legislative action changes the status quo [1] [3] [4]. The near-term landscape includes DMV pauses, employer vigilance on I-9 and CDL validity, and potential legal challenges or negotiated settlements over federal preemption and administrative authority, with developments likely to unfold after the September–October 2025 rulemaking and enforcement actions [2] [4].