861 F.3d 944
9th Cir.2017Background
- Long-running dispute over Mexico-domiciled trucking companies operating in the U.S.; Congress required a pilot program before granting long‑haul authority (2007 Act §6901).
- FMCSA ran a pilot program; only 13 Mexican carriers participated. FMCSA supplemented with data from 952 other Mexico‑owned long‑haul carriers and concluded Mexico‑domiciled carriers operate at equivalent safety levels.
- D.C. Circuit (Teamsters I) earlier upheld FMCSA’s pilot program plan and its allowance of Mexican commercial driver’s licenses.
- Petitioners (International Brotherhood of Teamsters and Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association) challenged FMCSA’s grant of long‑haul authority to specific Mexico‑domiciled carriers (Trajosa) and alleged the pilot results were statistically insufficient and that Mexican drivers should need U.S. licenses.
- The Ninth Circuit found (1) constitutional and prudential standing for petitioners, (2) the Trajosa permit and the denial of the Teamsters’ protest were final agency actions, but (3) the substance of whether the pilot results justified granting long‑haul authority is committed to agency discretion and thus unreviewable under the APA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioners can challenge FMCSA’s grant of long‑haul permits | Teamsters: pilot produced too small a sample to support safety conclusion; decision exceeds statutory limits | FMCSA: statute entrusts evaluation to agency; pilot plan satisfied statutory requirements | Court: petitioners have standing, but the Secretary’s decision whether pilot results warrant permits is committed to agency discretion and unreviewable |
| Whether the Pilot Program Report is final agency action | Teamsters: report culminated the program and is reviewable | FMCSA: report had no legal effect; permits are separate final actions | Court: Pilot Program Report is not final and not reviewable; permits and denial of protest are final |
| Whether statute (49 U.S.C. §31315(c)(2)(C) / 2007 Act) requires statistically valid results before issuing permits | Teamsters: §31315(c)(2)(C) requires a reasonable number of participants to yield statistically valid findings | FMCSA: §31315(c)(2) governs pilot plans (not results); Congress left evaluation to agency discretion | Court: §31315(c)(2) applies to plans only; no statutory benchmark for results — decision committed to agency discretion |
| Whether allowing Mexican drivers to use Mexican commercial licenses was unlawful | Drivers Assn.: FMCSA exceeded authority by accepting Mexican licenses for U.S. operations | FMCSA: U.S. law permits use of Mexican commercial licenses; previously litigated | Court: Issue precluded by Teamsters I; D.C. Circuit already rejected this claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (constitutional standing test)
- Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821 (agency actions committed to discretion are unreviewable)
- Bennett v. Spear, 520 U.S. 154 (final agency action test)
- Int’l Bhd. of Teamsters v. U.S. Dep’t of Transp., 724 F.3d 206 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (earlier decision upholding pilot plan and license rule)
- Sherley v. Sebelius, 610 F.3d 69 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (competitor standing doctrine)
- Motor Vehicles Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29 (arbitrary and capricious standard)
- Carpenter v. Dep’t of Transp., 13 F.3d 313 (9th Cir. 1994) (Hobbs Act review of DOT final orders)
- Taylor v. Sturgell, 553 U.S. 880 (issue preclusion standard)
- Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic & Institutional Rights, Inc., 547 U.S. 47 (Article III presence of one party with standing suffices)