Sponsors
Want my take on what this bill would do?
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Adds a nonpreemption clause stating that title 49 does not preempt a State from adopting or enacting laws, regulations, orders, or other requirements related to limiting the duration that a railroad carrier may block a grade rail crossing.
Adds a new paragraph clarifying that title 49 does not preempt State laws limiting the duration that a railroad carrier may block a grade rail crossing and defines 'State' to include the District of Columbia.
Prevents federal law from blocking states (including the District of Columbia) from enacting limits on how long a train may block a roadway at a grade crossing. It adds that non‑preemption rule into two places in federal Title 49 and explicitly defines “State” to include D.C., preserving state authority to set and enforce crossing-blocking time limits.
Adds a new subparagraph (C) to 49 U.S.C. 10501(c)(3) stating that, notwithstanding any other law, title 49 does not preempt a State from adopting laws, regulations, orders, or other requirements that limit the duration a railroad carrier may block a grade rail crossing.
Adds a new paragraph (3)(A) to 49 U.S.C. 20106(a) stating that, notwithstanding any other law, title 49 does not preempt a State from adopting laws, regulations, orders, or other requirements that limit the duration a railroad carrier may block a grade rail crossing.
Adds paragraph (3)(B) to 49 U.S.C. 20106(a) defining the term “State” in this paragraph to mean a State of the United States and the District of Columbia.
Who is affected and how:
Railroads and rail carriers: Directly affected because they will need to comply with any state or D.C. rules that limit how long a train may block a grade crossing. If many states adopt different limits, railroads could face operational adjustments, schedule changes, and increased risk of fines or local enforcement actions across jurisdictions.
State governments and local governments: Gain clearer authority to enact and enforce maximum blocking times at grade crossings. Local jurisdictions may adopt ordinances, set penalties, or create enforcement processes to reduce crossing blockages.
Local communities, drivers, and businesses: Likely to benefit where states adopt limits—shorter delays at crossings can improve traffic flow, reduce congestion, and decrease delays for deliveries and commuters. Emergency responders may see faster response times when crossings are not blocked for long periods.
Courts and regulators: Potential for litigation or regulatory disputes over how state rules interact with other federal authorities (e.g., federal safety statutes, interstate commerce principles). The statute removes a federal preemption argument but does not eliminate all grounds for legal challenge.
Federal agencies and federal funding programs: Little direct effect in terms of new programs or funding; federal roles remain unchanged except that federal law is clarified not to preempt state blocking-time limits in the cited Title 49 provisions.
Net effect: The change is a narrow jurisdictional clarification that empowers states to act on crossing blockages but does not itself set standards, provide resources, or resolve all legal questions about federal vs. state authority.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced January 13, 2025 by Warren Davidson · Last progress January 13, 2025
Referred to the Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
Introduced in House