A unanimous Supreme Court just changed who pays for trucking accidents. The money can now move toward brokers, and the market will adjust around that fact.
Open for the fast read before you dive into the full article.
The Supreme Court ruling moves trucking-accident liability closer to brokers by allowing state negligence claims tied to unsafe carrier selection.
Large brokers now become more attractive litigation targets because they carry deeper insurance coverage and stronger balance sheets than many small carriers.
The decision is likely to raise broker insurance costs, make documented carrier vetting a business necessity and accelerate consolidation among smaller brokers facing new compliance pressure.
"Here, requiring C.H. Robinson to exercise ordinary care in selecting a carrier 'concerns' motor vehicles — most obviously, the trucks that will transport the goods."
The facts in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, LLC, decided May 14, are brutal. Shawn Montgomery was stopped on the side of an Illinois road when a truck operated by Caribe Transport II struck his rig. Montgomery lost his leg. Caribe had a "conditional" FMCSA safety rating at the time, with problems flagged in driver qualification, hours-of-service compliance and recordable crash rates. C.H. Robinson, the broker that booked the load, knew about the rating when it assigned the carrier.
Montgomery sued the driver, the carrier and the broker. The District Court and the Seventh Circuit dismissed the negligent-hiring claim against Robinson on FAAAA preemption grounds. The Supreme Court reversed, 9-0.
The move from oral argument in March to unanimous decision in May was quick. The industry has much longer to work out what it now owes the next plaintiff.
Stay close to the market
Get Rig Load Report in your inbox
Weekly freight market analysis, new markets and fresh commentary when it matters.
What the court actually decided
The legal question was narrow: Does FAAAA preempt a state-law negligent-hiring claim against a freight broker, or does the law's safety exception let that claim proceed?
Lower courts had split on the question. The Supreme Court heard oral argument in March and issued the unanimous decision less than two months later. Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence joined by Justice Samuel Alito.
FAAAA preempts state regulation of broker "prices, routes and services." The statute also preserves state authority over motor vehicle safety. The Court said carrier selection fits within that safety exception because the broker's choice determines which truck, driver and carrier move the load.
The ruling does not write a broker-safety manual. It allows state negligence claims when the alleged failure is the selection of an unsafe carrier. Ordinary care is back in play.
For brokers, that means checking available safety data, keeping a record of the decision and turning away carriers with obvious red flags.
The Transportation Intermediaries Association, the broker industry's trade group, said it was "deeply disappointed" with the decision. TIA President Chris Burroughs compared the ruling to "asking travel agents to evaluate the safety of a given airline despite the fact that the airline has been licensed to fly by the federal government."
That analogy captures the industry's objection. Federal regulators license the carrier. The Court says that does not end the broker's responsibility when the carrier's safety record is already visible.
Where the liability money goes now
Trucking-accident lawyers have always looked for defendants that can pay. Many carriers cannot.
Single-truck operators and small fleets usually carry the FMCSA minimum: $750,000 for general freight and $1 million or more for many hazardous materials categories. Many have limited assets beyond that. A serious injury or wrongful-death case can run past those limits quickly. After that, there may be little left to collect.
Large brokers are different. C.H. Robinson generated $16.2 billion in revenue in 2025. TQL, Coyote, RXO and Landstar operate in the same multibillion-dollar tier. Their insurance coverage is larger than carrier minimums, and their balance sheets can absorb settlements that small carriers cannot.
Loading costs.
Montgomery makes those balance sheets easier to reach.
Plaintiff firms already built around trucking litigation now have a clearer path to broker defendants. Some claims that would have settled against limited carrier insurance will be revalued with broker coverage in the equation. Some cases that might not have been worth filing without a broker defendant will now be filed.
The ruling changes more than legal theory. It changes where settlement money can flow in the next trucking-accident case.
The insurance reprice
Broker contingent auto liability insurance covers negligent-selection exposure. Errors and omissions coverage picks up procedural failures in broker operations. Both lines were already moving higher in 2024 and 2025 as plaintiff attorneys pushed harder toward broker defendants.
Montgomery gives underwriters a larger risk to price.
Insurance markets will not reset in a single quarter. Rates move through annual renewals. The first broker policies renewed after Montgomery will show how hard underwriters intend to move. The direction is easier to read than the size of the increase: more exposure, more scrutiny and higher premiums.
The increases will not land evenly. Small brokers with thin balance sheets feel them first. Large brokers can spread the cost through margin, customer pricing or both.
Underwriting will tighten, too. Brokers that cannot show documented carrier-vetting processes will face reduced limits, new exclusions or denied coverage. The compliance systems large brokers built over the past decade stop being optional. They become part of the cost of being insured.
The consolidation acceleration
Freight brokerage was consolidating before Montgomery. C.H. Robinson, TQL, Coyote, RXO and Landstar already had advantages in scale, technology, capital, carrier networks and shipper relationships. Thousands of small and mid-tier brokers were already under pressure from margin compression, technology spending and shipper preference for fewer counterparties.
Montgomery adds another fixed cost.
Carrier-vetting systems are no longer just good hygiene. Brokers now need them to get insured and defend themselves in court. For a broker doing $50 million in annual revenue, that cost can be heavy. For a broker doing $5 billion, it is a line item.
That points toward a faster version of a trend already underway. Mid-tier brokers can build the systems, sell to a larger broker that already has them or wind down. A cycle that might have taken five years can compress into two or three.
A top-10 broker announcing a major transaction before year-end would be a clean sign that compression has begun.
Carrier safety scores get repriced
FMCSA's BASIC scores under the Compliance, Safety, Accountability program have been public since 2010. They measure carrier performance across seven categories, including Unsafe Driving, Hours-of-Service Compliance and Vehicle Maintenance, and flag the worst performers for enforcement attention.
Until now, brokers had no clear legal duty to treat those scores as a screening tool. Carriers with poor scores still received loads because many brokers had no concrete legal reason to refuse them.
Montgomery changes the risk. A broker that assigns a load to a carrier with poor BASIC scores, especially in categories tied to crash risk, may be creating evidence for a later negligent-selection claim. If a wreck follows, the dispatch decision matters. The safety data was public. The broker assigned the load anyway.
Brokers will refuse more freight to carriers with red-flag scores. Those carriers will see their available freight pool shrink. Revenue per truck falls. Some exit. Carriers with cleaner records face less competition for their capacity and gain some pricing power.
The data has been public for 15 years. The change is that the data now has more legal force. Safety scores stop being background information and become a price variable.
The counter-reading
The bear case deserves some room. Direction and magnitude are different questions.
Insurance markets may have priced in Montgomery before the decision. Premium increases planned for 2026 and 2027 may already reflect the risk the Court formalized. Renewal data through year-end will test that assumption.
Plaintiff firms may bring fewer cases than expected. Negligent-selection claims still require proof that the broker breached the standard of care, that the breach caused the accident and that damages followed. That is a real litigation burden. Some firms will pass on weak causation facts.
The consolidation wave was already coming. Some 2026 brokerage M&A would have happened anyway. Montgomery may speed up the cycle without being the sole cause.
Carrier safety scores have always been available. Brokers that wanted to use them already did. Brokers that did not may add paperwork without changing much behavior. The operating change could be smaller than the legal change.
The next two quarters will supply the early evidence: insurance renewals, broker M&A announcements, FMCSA authority counts and changes in carrier safety-score distribution.
What this means in procurement
Shippers that use brokered freight should expect marginal rate creep. Broker insurance costs will move through load pricing as renewals roll through 2026 and into 2027. Procurement teams that build flexibility into the next RFP cycle will be better positioned than teams that lock in multiyear rates against a pre-Montgomery cost base.
They should also expect more paperwork. Brokers will ask for carrier-safety attestations, stronger indemnification language and certifications of due diligence. The administrative cost of brokered freight goes up.
Brokers of all sizes need to document the process, refuse risky carriers, raise rates where needed and decide whether current scale can absorb the new compliance burden. A mid-tier broker that cannot answer that question clearly should be talking to potential acquirers before more sellers come to market and multiples compress.
Carriers with clean safety records gain some pricing strength as brokers tighten dispatch standards. Carriers with red-flag scores have a harsher choice: invest in safety performance, accept less brokered freight or leave the market. Hours-of-service compliance, maintenance programs, driver training and cleaner records become commercial necessities, not just regulatory concerns.
Owner-operators and small fleets, which account for a disproportionate share of poor safety outcomes, face the most concentrated pressure.
The markets
The new market opening with this article is the top-10 broker M&A binary: Will any company in the top 10 of Transport Topics' annual freight brokerages ranking announce a $100 million or larger transaction, or a material restructuring, by Dec. 31, 2026?
That market gives the cleanest near-term signal on whether Montgomery is accelerating consolidation on the timeline this analysis suggests.
Several adjacent Rig Load markets are worth watching alongside it. The broader freight industry M&A market captures carrier-side consolidation that Montgomery could also accelerate. The FMCSA broker transparency rule is a separate regulatory question that interacts with the post-Montgomery compliance landscape. The motor carrier authority declinemarket prices the small-carrier side of the squeeze.
Most effects from Montgomery are 12 to 24 months out. The early signals are broker M&A announcements and insurance-renewal data. The slower ones are broker authority counts, carrier safety-score distribution and brokered share of freight volume.
Montgomery answers the legal question. The freight market answers the rest.
