On April 12, CBS’ “60 Minutes” put the trucking industry on blast. The industry, largely, didn’t argue back. The network’s segment on Super Ego Holding and the rise of chameleon carriers landed with strong approval in an industry where widespread agreement on issues is often lacking. Among those who care about safe roads and a strong trucking economy, the sentiment was nearly unanimous: it’s about time.

Seven days later, CBS returned with a follow-up that ruffled more feathers. The April 19 report brought freight brokers into the conversation, centering specifically on C.H. Robinson and its role in brokering loads to carriers with troubled safety records.

It explained the story of Dalilah Coleman, a 7-year-old left with a permanent brain injury after being struck by a truck hauling a C.H. Robinson-brokered load in California. Dalilah’s father, Marcus Coleman, said, “If we don’t go after the broker, this is going to continue happening.”

That framing of the broker as a responsible party, not just a neutral middleman, sits at the heart of a Supreme Court case that could fundamentally reshape how freight moves in this country.

What’s the case that the Supreme Court will decide on?

The case is Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, and a ruling is expected before the end of June.

In December 2017, a tractor-trailer driven by Yosniel Varela-Mojena, who was employed by carrier Caribe Transport II, struck Shawn Montgomery’s truck on the shoulder of an Illinois highway. Montgomery lost a leg. C.H. Robinson, the nation’s largest freight broker, had arranged the shipment Caribe was hauling. Montgomery sued the driver, the carrier, and C.H. Robinson.

The central legal question isn’t whether C.H. Robinson acted badly. It’s whether federal law allows a state negligent hiring claim against a freight broker at all.

The statute at issue is 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c), which is part of a 1994 transportation law designed to create a national regulatory framework for the trucking industry and prevent a patchwork of conflicting state standards. C.H. Robinson argues the law blocks state court claims against brokers; Montgomery argues a safety exception within the same statute keeps those claims alive.

Four federal circuit courts have weighed in, landing on opposite sides. The Seventh and Eleventh Circuits have held that negligent hiring claims against brokers are precluded by federal law. The Sixth and Ninth Circuits have held the law preserves them. That split is exactly why the Supreme Court stepped in.

What does the case have to do with CBS’ coverage? Why was the April 19 segment controversial?

The April 19 CBS report revisited the chameleon carrier issue and made the case that brokers were part of the problem. The reporting found that, over the past decade, C.H. Robinson had worked with carriers with documented safety concerns, including dozens bearing indicators of chameleon behavior.

C.H. Robinson’s public response leaned on the argument it had already made before the Supreme Court: it is the FMCSA’s job, not the broker’s, to determine carrier fitness. The company’s position is that brokers can only access publicly available data, including safety scores, inspection history, and out-of-service rates, and that confidential driver records and deeper operational information sit exclusively with regulators and the carriers themselves.

Ryan Wilson, VP of Broker Engagement at Matterhorn Insurance Group, framed the bind well, “Brokers are being asked to evaluate carriers without access to some of the deeper safety data that regulators or the carrier itself can see.”

What happens after the Supreme Court rules in Montgomery v. Caribe?

Most legal observers expect the Court to rule in favor of C.H. Robinson — affirming that federal law preempts state negligent hiring claims against brokers, a position aligned with the current federal government’s stance. Attorneys at Husch Blackwell characterized the most likely outcome as either a ruling affirming preemption outright or a narrow ruling that resolves the circuit ruling split. But even a win for brokers may not be the end of the story.

If C.H. Robinson and Caribe win: Congress will face pressure to act. The losing side will have every incentive to pursue a statutory fix, and public attention isn’t going to fade quickly. Broker transparency regulations are already in the pipeline independently of the case.

If Montgomery wins: Brokers could face negligent hiring claims in state courts wherever a selected carrier is involved in a crash, potentially creating 50 different standards for carrier due diligence.

Industry advocates have warned the Supreme Court that with this outcome:

• Brokers may gravitate toward larger carriers regardless of individual safety records
• Smaller carriers could find themselves squeezed out of brokered loads
• Insurance premiums could rise enough to push smaller brokers out of the market entirely

The share of freight moving through brokers has grown from roughly 6% in 2000 to more than 20% today. A reversal of that trajectory would be a structural shift for the entire industry.

Regardless of which way the ruling goes, attorneys note a separate and ongoing risk: brokers who exercise too much operational control over carriers — mandating check-ins, requiring branded markings on trailers, dictating driver behavior — move away from the role of intermediary and toward something closer to a de facto employer. That exposure exists in every state and doesn’t depend on the Supreme Court’s decision.

How should brokers and carriers prepare for the ruling?

The most probable outcome is still a ruling that shields brokers. But that’s not a reason to relax.

Even a courtroom win doesn’t protect brokerages or carriers from what’s coming on the regulatory side. The FMCSA’s focus on chameleon carriers is building momentum. More investigators are being hired and a new carrier registration system is currently rolling out.

Broker transparency rules are expected soon. And the CBS reporting has ensured that public scrutiny of freight safety will remain elevated regardless of the legal outcome.

For brokers, the best protection is a paper trail. That means using available tools to vet carriers thoroughly, documenting that process, and flagging the kinds of red flags that publicly available data can surface. Workflow AI for Brokers can help on that front, with dashboards that track carrier activity and surface patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed in a high-volume operation.

For carriers, a strong safety culture is the most durable hedge against scrutiny. That means staying current on equipment maintenance, investing in driver coaching, and going above and beyond on compliance. Transflo Mobile+ as a driver app and telematics with industry-proven and highly vetted Geotab ELDs make it easier for drivers to stay connected and compliant on the road. Additionally, Geotab GO Focus AI dash cams coach drivers in real time, giving fleets the visibility to catch problems before they become incidents.

Conclusion

The rest of 2026 could be among the most consequential stretches brokers and carriers have seen in decades. The Supreme Court typically hands down its major rulings by the end of June. Broker transparency rules are expected in May. The FMCSA’s crackdown on chameleon carriers is gathering steam. And public attention on freight safety isn’t going to dissipate.

The industry has always operated under pressure. What’s changing is who’s watching, and how closely.