Supreme Court Strips Brokers of Key Legal Defense in Carrier Selection

S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous 9-0 decision in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC that fundamentally reshapes liability exposure for freight brokers across North America. The ruling eliminates the long-standing legal shield that brokers have relied on—preemption under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA)—for defending against state-level negligent hiring claims.

This means brokers can no longer use federal preemption to dismiss tort claims in state courts; instead, they must now defend their carrier selection decisions as reasonable and defensible. The practical implications are immediate and systemic. Brokers must transition from a minimal vetting approach (confirming active USDOT authority and insurance) to a comprehensive risk assessment framework that documents safety ratings, inspection history, violation patterns, and consistent application of criteria across all carrier decisions. Justice Brett Kavanaugh's concurrence acknowledged that brokers selecting reputable carriers should be able to defend successfully, but the burden of proof has shifted entirely to the broker.

Without federal preemption as a legal shield, brokers now face potential state-by-state variations in what constitutes "reasonable care," creating a patchwork of compliance requirements and increasing exposure to litigation. For supply chain professionals, this ruling signals a structural shift in carrier risk management. The decision will likely drive consolidation among larger brokers with sophisticated compliance infrastructure while creating competitive pressure on smaller operators to invest in carrier intelligence systems, compliance documentation, and standardized vetting processes. Industry observers describe this as "one of the biggest changes in transportation in the last two decades," fundamentally altering how freight movement decisions are made and defended.