U.S. Code » Title 49 » Subtitle SUBTITLE VI— MOTOR VEHICLE AND DRIVER PROGRAMS › Part PART B— COMMERCIAL › Chapter CHAPTER 311— COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— LENGTH AND WIDTH LIMITATIONS

49 U.S.C. § 31114

Access to the Interstate System

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 49 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Prohibition on Denying Access.—A State may not enact or enforce a law denying to a commercial motor vehicle subject to this subchapter or subchapter I of this chapter reasonable access between—(1) the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways (except a segment exempted under section 31111(f) or 31113(e) of this title) and other qualifying Federal-aid Primary System highways designated by the Secretary of Transportation; and(2) terminals, facilities for food, fuel, repairs, and rest, and points of loading and unloading for household goods carriers, motor carriers of passengers, any towaway trailer transporter combination (as defined in section 31111(a)), or any truck tractor-semitrailer combination in which the semitrailer has a length of not more than 28.5 feet and that generally operates as part of a vehicle combination described in section 31111(c) of this title.(b)Exception.—This section does not prevent a State or local government from imposing reasonable restrictions, based on safety considerations, on a truck tractor-semitrailer combination in which the semitrailer has a length of not more than 28.5 feet and that generally operates as part of a vehicle combination described in section 31111(c) of this title.(Pub. L. 103–272, § 1(e), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 999; Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title V, § 5523(c)(2), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1560.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Revised

Section

Source (U.S. Code)

Source (Statutes at Large)

31114(a)

49 App.:2312(a).

Jan. 6, 1983, Pub. L. 97–424, § 412, 96 Stat. 2160; Oct. 30, 1984, Pub. L. 98–554, §§ 104(c), 106, 98 Stat. 2831, 2832; Dec. 18, 1991, Pub. L. 102–240, § 4006(b)(2), 105 Stat. 2151.

31114(b)

49 App.:2312(b).

In subsection (a), the words “Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways” are substituted for “Interstate and Defense Highway System” for consistency in the revised chapter.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2015—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 114–94 inserted “any towaway trailer transporter combination (as defined in section 31111(a)),” after “passengers,”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2015 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 114–94 effective Oct. 1, 2015, see section 1003 of Pub. L. 114–94, set out as a note under section 5313 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: Aux Sable Liquid Prods. v. Murphy, 526 F.3d 1028 (7th Cir. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Aux Sable Liquid Prods. v. Murphy, 526 F.3d 1028 (7th Cir. 2008). · cites it 6× “Aux Sable then brought suit seeking injunctive relief under the STAA, as codified at 49 U.S.C. § 31114 , and under the Illinois Vehicle Code, 625 III.”
Town Of Delafield v. Cent. Transp. Kriewaldt, 2020 WI 61 (Wis. 2020). · cites it 10× “The STAA and Accompanying Federal Regulations ¶10 The portion of the STAA that requires states to provide reasonable access to commercial motor vehicles is found in 49 U.S.C. § 31114 . Subsection (a) provides that a state "may not enact or enforce a law denying to a commercial…”
New Hampshire Motor Transp. Ass'n v. Town of Plaistow, 67 F.3d 326 (1st Cir. 1995). · cites it 4× “” 49 U.S.C. § 31114 . This provision, which is at the heart of this ease, reads as follows: § 31114.”
Crest Hill Land Dev., LLC v. City of Joliet, 396 F.3d 801 (7th Cir. 2005). “Crest filed its two-count complaint on May 20, 2003, alleging in Count I violations of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, 49 U.S.C. § 31114 , and in Count, II violations of the ’Illinois Motor Vehicle Code, 625 Ill.”
Mason & Dixon Lines, Inc. v. STEUDLE, 761 F. Supp. 2d 611 (E.D. Mich. 2011). · cites it 3× “Count V alleges a violation of 49 U.S.C. § 31114 (part of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act) and an implementing regulation, 23 C.”
Garza v. City of La Porte, 160 F. Supp. 3d 986 (S.D. Tex. 2016). · cites it 2× “The district court held that the STAA did not preempt the town’s injunction, citing 49 U.S.C. § 31114 (the STAA’s reasonable access provision).”
Fed. Hous. Fin. Agency v. City of Chicago, 962 F. Supp. 2d 1044 (N.D. Ill. 2013). “The City did not seek discovery concerning FHFA’s allegation that the ordinance imposes an impermissible tax on the federal government.”
Keck v. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Golden, 998 S.W.2d 13 (Ky. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “49 U.S.C. § 31114 . The proper analysis, as we see it, is whether or not the noise control ordinance, which essentially prohibits heavy commercial vehicles from operating in an area zoned residential during hours of darkness, conflicts with or violates the “reasonable access”…”
The Mason & Dixon Lines Inc. v. Kirk Steudle, 683 F.3d 289 (6th Cir. 2012). · cites it 2× “§ 31114 (a)(2) The plaintiffs also argue that the State’s unwillingness to open the ramps is foreclosed by a provision of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act, 49 U.S.C. § 31114 (a)(2), which states that, absent safety considerations, “[a] State may not enact or enforce a…”
Town of Delafield v. Cent. Transp. Kriewaldt, 932 N.W.2d 423 (Wis. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “1 *182 ¶3 Following a court trial, the circuit court granted Central Transport's motion to dismiss the citation on the basis that the seasonal weight restriction did not allow Central Transport reasonable access to its Town customer and thus was preempted by federal law,…”
Hanscom’s Truck Stop v. Portsmouth (D.N.H. 1998). · cites it 13× “Background Hanscom’s filed this action for declaratory and injunctive relief, based on an argument that the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 (“Act”), as amended, 49 U.S.C. § 31114 , pre-empts the Ordinance.”
City of La Vergne v. Brian Ristau (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “Ristau, the ordinance conflicts with 49 U.S.C. § 31114 , which provides that states “may not enact or enforce a law denying to a commercial motor vehicle .”
Show all 18 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.