Solicitor General requests 10 minutes of oral argument as TIA and major freight brokers file amicus briefs ahead of March 4 hearing
The Trump administration has formally thrown its support behind C.H. Robinson in the Supreme Court case that could redefine broker liability under federal transportation law.
In a move that surprised many observers, the administration not only filed an amicus brief backing the broker but also asked the court for time to present oral arguments when the case is heard March 4. Solicitor General D. John Sauer requested 10 minutes of C.H. Robinson’s allotted argument time, a request the broker has agreed to.
The case, Montgomery v. Caribe, centers on whether freight brokers can be held liable under state tort law when a carrier they hire is involved in an accident. While the plaintiff is truck driver Montgomery—who was struck while standing on an Illinois highway—the dispute effectively pits Montgomery against C.H. Robinson, which hired Caribe Transport, the carrier involved in the incident.
At issue is the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) and whether its “safety exception,” which allows certain state-level claims, applies to brokers. The Seventh Circuit ruled it does not, severing C.H. Robinson from the case. That decision aligned with other rulings, including Ye v. GlobalTranz and Gauthier v. TQL, but conflicted with recent decisions in Miller v. C.H. Robinson and Cox v. TQL, creating a circuit split that prompted Supreme Court review.
In its filing, the Solicitor General argued that the federal government has a strong interest in preserving FAAAA’s preemption framework, which was enacted to prevent states from undermining federal deregulation of transportation services. Sauer wrote that the statute’s reference to laws “with respect to motor vehicles” lacks a sufficiently direct connection to broker conduct to justify state tort claims against brokers.
The government’s participation, Sauer noted, is consistent with past cases in which the federal government defended FAAAA’s deregulatory goals, though the filing did not address the more recent surge in conflicting circuit court rulings.
Under the proposed argument structure, attorneys for Montgomery would receive 30 minutes, C.H. Robinson 20 minutes, and the Solicitor General 10 minutes.
Trade groups and industry players have also lined up behind C.H. Robinson. The Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA) filed an amicus brief arguing that exposing brokers to state negligence claims would impose unworkable obligations on the industry. TIA contends brokers lack the tools, authority, and access to evaluate driver-level safety decisions, responsibilities that fall under federal oversight.
“No valid way exists for a broker to compare and contrast motor carrier safety records in any consistent and meaningful way,” the TIA wrote, warning that subjecting brokers to varying state standards would undermine efficient interstate commerce.
Another brief was filed by a group calling itself “Interested Freight Brokers,” representing brokerage units of major carriers including ArcBest, J.B. Hunt, Saia, and others. Their attorneys argued that treating brokers as responsible for motor vehicle safety would blur the legal distinction between brokers and carriers, undercutting federal regulations and harming market efficiency.
The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to have sweeping implications for freight brokers, 3PLs, and the broader transportation industry.
