New English Proficiency Rule Sidelines Thousands of Truck Drivers

The trucking industry is facing yet another major regulatory shake-up as the current administration’s English proficiency enforcement policy removes an estimated 6,000 drivers from the road this year.  The measure, which intensifies oversight of a long-standing but loosely applied federal rule, has ignited controversy across the transportation sector, civil rights groups, and several state governments.

A Rule Revived—and Reinforced

At the center of the debate is 49 C.F.R. § 391.11(b)(2), a federal regulation that has existed for decades, requiring commercial drivers to “speak and read the English language sufficiently” to understand traffic signs, communicate with the public, and interact with law enforcement.  While the rule itself isn’t new, its strict enforcement—effective June 25, 2025—marks a significant change in federal oversight.

Under the policy, roadside inspections must begin in English, and if inspectors suspect a driver lacks proficiency, a two-step evaluation is triggered. Failure can now lead to an immediate out-of-service order, effectively removing the driver from operation.

Transportation Secretary Sean P. Duffy emphasized that the goal is to ensure safety and consistency nationwide, but the ripple effects are already being felt.

State Pushback and Funding Threats

The policy has become a flashpoint between federal and state authorities.  The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has withheld over $40 million in federal highway and safety funds from California, accusing the state of not adequately enforcing the new English standards.  Officials warned that additional funding—potentially totaling $160 million—could be withheld if noncompliance continues.

California and several other states, including Washington and New Mexico, argue that their commercial drivers already meet safety benchmarks and maintain crash rates below the national average.  These states contend that the rule’s application is punitive and politically motivated, rather than evidence-based.

Industry Fallout: Fleets Scramble to Adapt

For many trucking companies, the new enforcement comes at a time when driver shortages are already squeezing capacity.  Fleets are now developing internal testing programs and English training modules to help drivers meet the updated requirements.

Still, the rapid implementation has led to confusion and operational disruptions.  Many affected drivers are immigrants and non-native English speakers who have safely operated for years under previous enforcement norms.  Critics say the rule disproportionately impacts Latino drivers and could sideline skilled professionals without a clear safety benefit.

Industry groups argue that safety depends on driver skill and training, not language fluency.  “There is no solid data showing English proficiency correlates with fewer crashes,” noted one trucking association leader, who warned the policy could worsen labor shortages and strain supply chains.

Congress Weighs In: Codifying the Rule

The debate has now moved to Capitol Hill.  Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) recently introduced S.2991, a bill designed to codify English Language Proficiency (ELP) requirements for commercial drivers.  A similar House bill, Connor’s Law, introduced earlier this year, seeks to permanently enshrine ELP enforcement into federal statute.

Named after Connor Dzion, an 18-year-old killed in a 2017 Florida crash involving a truck driver allegedly unable to read road signs, the bill aims to make enforcement uniform nationwide.

Supporters, including the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA), say the legislation would bring consistency and enhance safety.  “Being able to read signs and communicate with law enforcement isn’t just convenient—it’s essential,” said OOIDA President Todd Spencer, who applauded the initiative as a step toward professionalism and accountability in trucking.

Balancing Safety and Workforce Reality

While few disagree with the importance of communication on the road, the timing and scale of enforcement have raised questions about its practicality.  Many trucking firms already operate under significant regulatory and labor pressures.  Removing thousands of experienced drivers—many of whom have proven track records—risks deepening existing shortages and disrupting freight movement.

The coming months will be critical as the industry, lawmakers, and courts navigate the fallout.  Whether the stricter English enforcement truly enhances road safety—or simply reshapes the nation’s trucking workforce—remains to be seen.