On February 9, 2015, The Litigation Center filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant review in Penske v. Dilts, to decide whether the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA)—the federal statute prohibiting states from enacting measures that “relate to a price, route, or service of any motor carrier”—preempts California’s meal and rest break requirements.
(August 18, 2014) Today, the ATA Litigation Center filed an amicus brief (click title for pdf) urging the Ninth Circuit to reconsider the decision of the three-judge panel in Dilts v. Penske, which held that the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act (FAAAA) does not preempt application of California meal- and rest-break requirements to motor carrier operations. The FAAAA preempts state laws that relate to a motor carrier's prices, routes, and services, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly explained that this reflects Congress's intent to expansively prevent states from interfering with national uniformity and market-driven efficiency in the trucking industry. In the past several years, multiple district courts have held that California's break requirements are preempted because they restrict the services a motor carrier can provide, and the routes it can choose. On July 9, 2014, however, the Dilts panel reached the opposite conclusion. ATA's brief--which was joined by the California Trucking Association and the Truckload Carriers Association--explains that review by the full Ninth Circuit is necessary because the panel's decision is out of step with relevant Supreme Court precedent, and because the issue is one of grave importance to national uniformity in the trucking industry.
Proposed legislation in the District of Columbia would bar the District from registering any new diesel vehicles after 2017. Under the International Registration Plan, that would in effect prevent any IRP-registered vehicle, no matter where based, from entering Washington, even on a permit. ATA and several other trucking associations have sent DC a letter indicating the potentially very serious problems with its proposed legislation.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its long-awaited ruling on American Trucking Associations’ challenge to the most recent revisions in the hours-of-service rules; striking down a provision requiring short-haul drivers to take 30-minute off-duty break, but leaving the bulk of the rule unchanged.
On Friday, July 12, FMCSA released revised guidance regarding the new 30-minute rest break. The new guidance raised certain questions about the legality of drivers exercising constant attendance over hazmat loads, especially security-sensitive hazardous materials that require a security plan.
In testimony today before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s panel on highways and transit, Steve Williams, chairman and CEO of Maverick USA, said upcoming changes to federal hours-of-service rules are costly and unsupported by data or research.
In an opinion handed down this morning, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with American Trucking Associations...
On April 16, 2013, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in ATA’s challenge to the Port of Los Angeles’ attempt to impose conditions...