Washington just slammed the brakes on California with a $40 million penalty over lax truck driver regulations.
Fox News reported that Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy has decided to withhold substantial federal funding from the Golden State for failing to enforce English proficiency standards for commercial truck drivers, a move sparked by a tragic incident in Florida.
Let’s rewind to the beginning of this bumpy road. Back in 2018, Harjinder Singh, a 28-year-old Indian citizen, crossed into the United States from Mexico without authorization.
His journey took a dark turn years later, leading to a devastating event that’s now at the heart of this policy clash.
Fast forward to August 2025, when Singh, driving with a commercial license issued by California, made an illegal U-turn in Ft. Pierce, Florida, resulting in a crash that claimed three lives. He was arrested on charges of vehicular homicide and immigration violations, and is currently held without bond.
Here’s the kicker: Singh had failed an English proficiency test, yet California still handed him a commercial driver’s license. State officials claim he held a valid work permit at the time, but that’s little comfort to those who see this as a dangerous oversight.
Even before the fatal crash, Singh’s record wasn’t spotless—he was cited for speeding in New Mexico just a month prior. That bodycam footage from state police raises questions about why he was still behind the wheel of a big rig.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy didn’t mince words when announcing the funding cut on Wednesday, tying it directly to California’s refusal to uphold language requirements mandated by federal guidelines.
“California is the only state in the nation that refuses to ensure big rig drivers can read our road signs and communicate with law enforcement,” Duffy said. “This is a fundamental safety issue that impacts you and your family on America’s roads.”
Duffy’s critique, echoed by Florida officials, points to a broader concern about states like California and Washington flouting rules that could prevent tragedies.
His reference to an executive order from President Donald Trump underscores the administration’s stance: safety isn’t negotiable. And let’s be honest—shouldn’t understanding the language of the road be a baseline for hauling tons of cargo?
Duffy doubled down on social media, posting on X with a sharp jab at California’s defiance. “The Golden State thinks it’s OK to ignore @USDOT English language requirements for truckers,” he wrote. “You can play all the games you want, but not at the expense of American lives.”
California, predictably, isn’t taking this lying down. Diana Crofts-Pelayo, spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom, pushed back hard against Duffy’s narrative, arguing that the state’s track record on road safety speaks for itself.
“The reality is simple: Commercial driver's license holders in California had a fatal accident rate nearly 40% LOWER than the national average,” Crofts-Pelayo stated. “Texas, the only state with more commercial driver's license holders, has a rate nearly 50% higher than California's.”
While those numbers are impressive, they sidestep the core issue of whether language proficiency played a role in Singh’s case. Stats are one thing, but a preventable loss of life is another—shouldn’t every safeguard be in place, no matter how “safe” the state claims to be?
This showdown isn’t just about $40 million—it’s about who gets to set the rules of the road. The Trump administration sees California’s stance as a direct challenge to federal authority and public safety, especially when lives are on the line.
Critics of California’s policies argue that progressive approaches to licensing may prioritize inclusion over accountability, potentially putting motorists at risk. If a driver can’t read signs or speak with law enforcement, how can we trust them with an 80,000-pound vehicle? It’s a fair question, even if it steps on some ideological toes.