Class-Action Suit Alleges Nearly 20,000 Immigrant Commercial Drivers Lost Licenses Without Due Process Amid Federal Compliance Crackdown

Friday, December 26, 2025, 5:15 P.M. ET. 5 Minute Read, By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Englebrook Independent News,

ALAMEDA COUNTY, CA.- Just when California’s handling of immigration and regulatory enforcement appeared unable to grow more convoluted, the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) now faces a sweeping class-action lawsuit alleging it unlawfully revoked, or moved to revoke, nearly 20,000 commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) issued to immigrant drivers and business owners without providing legally required due process.

     The lawsuit, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, challenges the DMV’s planned mass cancellation of non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses, arguing the agency acted without adequate notice, without a meaningful opportunity to be heard, and without offering a lawful path for drivers to correct alleged administrative errors, many of which plaintiffs claim were caused by the DMV itself.

     The case is formally styled as a Verified Class Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief.

Parties To The Lawsuit;

     The suit is brought on behalf of John Does 1–4, Jane Doe 1, and The Jakara Movement, a Fresno-based immigrant advocacy organization that claims to represent hundreds of affected commercial drivers across California.

     Named as defendants are the California Department of Motor Vehicles and DMV Director Steve Gordon, in his official capacity.

     The matter is before the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda.

Legal Representation;

     Plaintiffs are represented by a coalition of civil-rights and advocacy law firms, including Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP, The Sikh Coalition, and the Asian Law Caucus. Attorneys listed on the filing include David R. Singh of Weil Gotshal and Munmeeth K. Soni, legal director of The Sikh Coalition. Several counsel note that pro hac vice applications are forthcoming.

Scope Of The Revocations;

     According to the complaint, on November 6, 2025, the DMV notified 17,299 immigrant drivers and business owners that their non-domiciled CDLs would be canceled effective January 5, 2026, citing incorrect expiration dates within the DMV’s licensing system.

     Subsequent notices were sent to approximately 2,700 additional drivers, bringing the total number of affected individuals to 19,999, with cancellations scheduled for mid-February 2026.

     Plaintiffs allege the expiration errors originated within the DMV’s own administrative systems and that drivers are now facing the loss of their livelihoods for mistakes they did not cause.

Due Process At The Center Of The Case;

     The lawsuit does not dispute the DMV’s authority to regulate commercial driving credentials. Instead, it challenges the agency’s method.

     Under California law, when a license is issued with an incorrect expiration date, the DMV must either cancel the license without prejudice and allow immediate reapplication under Vehicle Code § 13100 or correct the expiration date directly pursuant to Vehicle Code § 12816.

     Plaintiffs allege the DMV did neither. Instead, the agency issued cancellation notices while simultaneously refusing to process corrected or amended non-domiciled CDLs, leaving drivers unable to work and without a legal pathway to resolve the issue.

     The complaint’s second cause of action asserts a violation of Article I, Section 7 of the California Constitution, arguing that commercial driver’s licenses constitute protected property and liberty interests when they are essential to earning a living.

Relief Sought;

     The plaintiffs are asking the court to certify the case as a class action and to declare DMV cancellation notices dated November 5 and December 15, 2025, null and void. They seek injunctive relief requiring the DMV to provide a lawful and immediate process for correcting CDL records without interruption to driving privileges, along with costs and attorneys’ fees.

Federal Pressure And Non-Domiciled CDLs;

     The lawsuit unfolds amid heightened federal scrutiny of California’s CDL practices.

     Beginning September 29, 2025, the DMV announced it could no longer issue or renew limited-term legal-presence non-domiciled CDLs, citing emergency compliance requirements imposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

     Non-domiciled CDLs have historically been issued to certain non-citizens lawfully present in the United States, including individuals holding temporary work authorization, asylum, or refugee status.

     In late September, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration issued an interim final rule tightening eligibility standards and mandating enhanced immigration-status verification, including use of the federal SAVE system. Federal officials have since accused California of allowing some CDLs to remain valid beyond lawful presence periods.

Who Is Actually Affected;

     The lawsuit itself does not assert that the affected drivers are undocumented, but many have been proven to be. Plaintiffs describe them as immigrant drivers and business owners, many of whom they claim remain legally eligible to hold CDLs if permitted to correct administrative errors.

     Federal regulators, however, maintain that California’s prior systems allowed improper issuance and extension of certain credentials, claims that now underpin the state’s sweeping enforcement action.

     At issue is whether the DMV can lawfully cancel nearly 20,000 licenses in bulk without individualized review or meaningful due process.

What Happens Next;

     Absent judicial intervention, the first wave of CDL cancellations is scheduled for January 5, 2026, with additional revocations planned for mid-February.

     The California DMV has declined public comment, citing pending litigation.

     The case now places California’s licensing practices and the livelihoods of thousands of commercial drivers squarely before the courts.

Editor’s Note:

Englebrook Independent News reviewed the full class-action petition and complaint filed in Alameda County Superior Court and relied exclusively on the court filing for all factual claims regarding parties, timelines, legal causes of action, statutory citations, and requested relief. Additional context was drawn from California DMV public advisories and federal FMCSA/USDOT regulatory releases issued in September 2025. By Jennifer Hodges, Political Editor: Englebrook Independent News.