Fact check: Where did illegal immigrants with CDL kill families

1. What reporters say happened — two fatal crashes, similar allegations of noncitizen drivers

News reports link two tragic crashes to truck drivers identified as Harjinder Singh in Florida and Jashanpreet Singh in California, each described as being in the United States without legal status and each connected to collisions that killed multiple people. Coverage highlights that both drivers had been issued CDLs by U.S. states — Washington in the Florida case and California in the California case — and that their immigration status and licensing histories have become central to inquiries and media attention. Both incidents triggered scrutiny of state licensing practices and federal safety rules, and reporting dates cluster on October 24–25, 2025 ^{[1] [2]}.

2. The licensing histories that reporters emphasize — failed tests and upgrades

Multiple accounts report that Harjinder Singh failed his commercial driver's license test repeatedly before eventually receiving a license in Washington state; outlets note ten failed attempts in two months prior to issuance. Separately, reporting on Jashanpreet Singh focuses on California issuing or upgrading a CDL despite federal restrictions, with the Department of Transportation asserting that the state did not enforce emergency rules intended to restrict CDLs for certain noncitizens. These specific licensing details have become central factual anchors in coverage and in the federal and state responses that followed ^{[1] [5] [4]}.

3. Federal responses and deadlines — DOT pressure and possible funding penalties

The Department of Transportation publicly pressured California over issuance of a CDL to the California crash driver, stating the state must identify and revoke noncompliant licenses within 30 days or face potential federal funding consequences. The DOT framed this as enforcement of an emergency action designed to uphold stricter standards for commercial licensing in the context of noncitizen applicants. This federal posture underscores that the incidents have shifted from criminal investigations into broader regulatory and intergovernmental disputes over compliance with federal safety and immigration-related eligibility requirements ^{[2] [3]}.

4. Legal countermeasures — lawsuits and criminal charges enter the mix

Florida’s Attorney General has sued California and Washington, arguing those states violated federal safety and immigration rules by issuing CDLs to individuals in the U.S. illegally; the lawsuit seeks to halt state practices the AG alleges are noncompliant. In the California prosecution, Jashanpreet Singh pleaded not guilty to counts including gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated and a DUI-related charge, illustrating that criminal accountability is proceeding alongside civil and administrative challenges. These dual tracks mean outcomes depend on both courtroom adjudication and administrative enforcement ^{[1] [4]}.

5. Disagreement over causation and policy responsibility — competing narratives

Outlets and officials diverge on where responsibility lies: some coverage and the DOT emphasize state procedural failures and noncompliance with federal rules, while other narratives—particularly from state officials criticized by the DOT—frame the incidents as individual criminal acts not governed solely by licensing policy. The White House and federal agencies highlighted systemic patterns, even as state-level defenses argue their licensing decisions complied with applicable law or that federal guidance was ambiguous. This discord reveals policy disagreement as much as fact dispute, shaping public attribution of blame ^{[6] [3]}.

6. What is firmly established versus what remains unresolved

Established facts in the reporting include that two fatal crashes occurred, the drivers involved were identified in media accounts, both had CDLs issued by U.S. states, and federal and state authorities responded with investigations, legal actions, and enforcement letters in late October 2025. Unresolved points include precise administrative rationales used by states when issuing or upgrading the CDLs, the full evidentiary links between licensing actions and crash causation, and final legal outcomes in both the criminal cases and inter-state lawsuits. Criminal culpability and policy liability remain under adjudication ^{[1] [2] [7]}.

7. Possible agendas shaping coverage and official statements

Coverage from some outlets emphasizes licensing failures and federal enforcement, which aligns with agendas prioritizing regulatory compliance and public safety. Other statements—particularly those defending state actions or focusing on individual criminal behavior—may reflect political interests in shielding state officials from blame. Florida’s lawsuit and the DOT’s public deadlines are actions that can be read as politically consequential moves as well as policy enforcement, meaning stakeholders may be advancing legal or political objectives alongside public-safety claims ^{[1] [3]}.

8. How to follow developments and what to watch next

Watch for court filings in the Florida AG’s lawsuit against California and Washington, the outcome of criminal proceedings against the California driver, and any DOT determinations on federal funding or compliance adjustments. Future reporting dated after October 25, 2025, will be needed to confirm administrative revocations, final indictments or convictions, and whether federal funding penalties are imposed. These next steps will determine whether the events prompt policy changes or remain framed as isolated criminal tragedies ^{[4] [3]}.