OOIDA Responds to latest losses in the 5th & 9th Court of Appeals

OOIDA President Jim Johnston
This is the face of ignorance and bigotry in the fight against allowing Mexican trucks into the United States. Every effort this man has made in his rage against Mexicans and Mexico has been soundly defeated in the courts and in the halls of public opinion.

A week after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out the Teamsters and OOIDA’s latest baseless and frivolous lawsuits, OOIDA has issued a non-responsive response on their website landlinemag.com

Sandi Soendker, Land Line editor-in-chief, to her credit, wrote, without embellishment the following:

A federal court has ruled in favor of the U.S. Department of Transportation regarding the cross-border trucking program with Mexico. A combined legal challenge by the Teamsters and intervenor OOIDA was argued March 15 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court announced the ruling June 29.

Congress originally ordered the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to conduct a pilot program before granting long-haul operating authority to Mexican-domiciled carriers.  In the first legal showdown, before the pilot program began, the D.C. Circuit rejected truckers’ challenge to the lawfulness of the agency’s plan for the pilot program. At that time, the D.C. Circuit ruled that U.S. law permits Mexican truckers to use their Mexican-issued CDLs for the pilot program.

In the latest challenge, the Teamsters and OOIDA argued that the DOT pilot program’s meager participation and results were inadequate. In San Francisco last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Court denied the petitions for review of the DOT’s order. The court held it did not have the authority to make a decision about the sufficiency of the agency’s pilot program.

The court also denied OOIDA’s argument that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration lacked statutory authority to issue permits for U.S. long-haul operations to Mexico-domiciled trucking companies whose drivers did not have a U.S. CDL. The three-judge panel’s reason for rejecting the argument was that the D.C. Circuit court had already decided in the first challenge that it was permissible, although that holding appeared to be limited to the pilot program.

The court’s panel consisted of Circuit Judges Kim McLane Wardlaw; Ronald M. Gould and Consuelo M Callahan.

Meanwhile, another OOIDA cross-border suit was argued May 2 in the Fifth Circuit appellate court in New Orleans. That Circuit also decided that it did not have the authority to hear a challenge to the agency’s decision to grant permanent, nationwide, operating authority to Mexico-domiciled motor carriers.

So that’s twice at least, that Federal Courts have ruled on the validity of the Mexican Licencia Federal de Conductor.

So what does that leave OOIDA to do? They can appeal to the 9th Circuit for a full court review. Or they can ask the Supreme Court to look at the case, both which in all probability would be denied. There are no Constitutional issues involved here.

Will Jim Johnston, President of OOIDA continue to waste his member’s money on fighting this issue, where the only issue is Johnson’s rage and contempt for Mexicans and their country? Time will tell.

I do know after listening to Todd Spencers “testimony” before the US Trade Representatives panel last week and reviewing the written comments submitted to the panel, that OOIDA and the Teamster expect to use these same failed, bogus arguments to try and get Mexican trucks banned from the US during the renegotiation of NAFTA, something that will not be happening.

This post is part of the thread: Mexico Cross Border Pilot Program – an ongoing story on this site. View the thread timeline for more context on this post.