The ink wasn’t even dry on last month’s column before I found myself eating crow.

I wrote: “Owning trucks used to mean owning customers. Now it’s about owning risk.”

Turns out, I had seriously underestimated how much risk was about to land on every freight broker’s doorstep.

That’s the result of a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Montgomery v. Caribe Transport II, the C.H. Robinson broker liability case. The Montgomery decision means freight brokers can be sued under state negligence laws for allegedly hiring unsafe trucking companies, making carrier selection and ongoing monitoring far more important than before.

In an industry where everyone is a freight broker, my phone started ringing off the hook. Questions were fast, furious, and fearful. What does this mean? What should I do? How much liability is enough?

As the director of a freight brokerage, I dusted off my detective badge and started following the clues. I wasn’t about to gamble with our business, our customers, or our carrier partners. I needed facts, and I needed them fast.

Here’s what I’m learning about our post-Montgomery world.

Will lightning strike twice?

The headlines make it sound like every load tendered is a lawsuit waiting to happen. It isn’t.

A broker tenders a shipment to a carrier. That carrier has to be involved in a serious accident in the United States, probably a fatality. And lawyers then have to decide the broker’s carrier selection process was negligent. That’s a lot of dominoes to fall.

Sure, there’s risk. But most of that risk is within your control as a broker, and can be mitigated through the right processes, technology, and internal controls.

Looking under the hood

Once my initial concern wore off, I did what every responsible third party should be doing. Looking under their own hood.

The first question is simple. Are you relying on load board carriers or building your business around trusted partners?

The best brokers I know aren’t chasing the cheapest truck on the screen. They’re scaling with core carriers, committing freight, building relationships, and creating predictable lane volumes.

Too many brokers still race to the bottom. Buy low. Sell low. What matters is that $25 operating margin, not who’s hauling the freight.

If the Montgomery ruling teaches us anything, it’s this: time for higher standards. Most brokers are already doing it right. The rest will finally be forced to put up or shut up.

Vetting just got serious

Carrier vetting has never been easier or more important.

I’m stunned by how far the technology has come. Off-the-shelf, AI-based platforms will monitor a fleet’s safety scores, insurance coverage, operating authority, inspection history, and a host of other risk factors in real time.

No system is perfect. They all rely on government data, which can be incomplete, lagging, or just plain wrong. But if your carrier vetting process still consists of a spreadsheet and Joey your dispatcher saying, “I’ve got my buddy on this one,” you’re playing a risky game. The investment needed to do this right is also enough to separate the real brokers from the pretenders.

Are customers next?

Now that brokers are sharing the risk, are shippers next?

If that’s the case, I’m not a fan.

Shippers rarely deal directly with the carriers moving their freight. They do unknowingly hand plenty of business to shady operators through brokers who cut corners to cover a load. Making shippers culpable for decisions made inside a broker’s dispatch office feels like a bridge too far. Accountability needs to land in the right place.

Brokers rejoice

Here’s the irony. Montgomery may be a windfall for the freight brokers who feared it most.

Every broker has lived through the Friday 4 p.m. panic call. Customer ordered late, built late, missed their pickup, and now expects transportation to pull a rabbit out of a hat. 

When the load can’t move, it’s suddenly our emergency. That’s when mistakes get made.

Montgomery gives brokers a powerful new tool. Instead of cutting corners to cover a desperate load, they can point to clear compliance obligations and say no.

The cowboys will hate it. The professionals will use it to build transparent, scalable relationships.

Turns out, what felt like a burden was exactly the permission we’d been waiting for.