Raymond A. Atkins Ph.D.

RAYMOND ATKINS is widely regarded as a leading authority in the field of transportation law, with over 25 years of experience advising some of the world’s largest transportation companies on their most complex and consequential legal challenges. His practice spans high-stakes transactions, regulatory litigation, appeals, competition issues, and matters involving federal preemption.

Ray serves as the co-leader of Sidley’s nationally acclaimed Transportation practice, which has earned a top-tier ranking from Chambers USA in Nationwide Transportation: Rail (for Railroads) every year since 2007. The group is consistently recognized for its knowledge and experience, with clients saying “Sidley Austin’s transportation team is second to none. It has a broad bench of experts, who are analytical and forward-thinking on a variety of matters in the rail space” (Chambers USA 2025). Sidley’s Transportation practice also received recognition by Legal 500 United States for Rail and Road—Litigation and Regulation (2025).

“Ray is forward-thinking and always looks for opportunities to provide added value. He is an expert in economic regulatory issues confronting the industry.”
Chambers USA 2025

A seasoned litigator and strategist, Ray represents clients in federal and state court litigations, private arbitrations, and administrative proceedings. He has briefed dozens of appeals and boasts a long track record of success before appellate courts. Drawing on his prior government experience, Ray also regularly advises clients in high-profile federal rulemakings and investigations.

Ray leverages his combination of a Ph.D. in economics and legal training to help craft innovative, data-driven solutions to the regulatory and commercial challenges facing modern transportation companies. His ability to blend legal insight with economic analysis sets him apart in a field that increasingly demands both.

Before joining Sidley in 2013, Ray served as General Counsel of the Surface Transportation Board (STB), the independent federal agency responsible for regulating interstate freight and passenger railroads, as well as select pipeline, motor, and water carriers. In that role, he represented the STB in over 50 appeals before the U.S. Courts of Appeals.

Recognitions and Honors

Ray’s exceptional legal work has earned him widespread recognition, including:

• Band 1 ranking from Chambers USA in Transportation: Rail (for Railroads)—Nationwide (2015–2025).
• Named a “Best Lawyer” by U.S. News (2019), “Lawyer of the Year” in Transportation law (2019), and recognized for Transportation law (2026) by The Best Lawyers in America®.
• Honored as a “Client Service All-Star” by BTI Consulting Group (2020), a distinction based solely on feedback from corporate counsel for his client service.

Regulatory Disputes and Litigation Highlights

• Union Pacific Railroad – Terminal Trackage Rights Dispute (STB Docket No. FD 36844): Lead counsel representing Union Pacific before the Surface Transportation Board in a high-stakes proceeding initiated by Metra seeking terminal trackage rights for passenger operations in Chicago. Also representing Union Pacific in companion federal court litigation involving complex contract and antitrust claims.
• Private Arbitration – Intermodal Facility Acquisition: Representing a major transportation client in confidential arbitration proceedings concerning the contested acquisition of a strategically important intermodal facility.
• Gulf Coast Passenger Rail Service Dispute (STB Docket No. FD 36496): Served as trial counsel in a groundbreaking 11-day regulatory hearing before the STB regarding Amtrak’s proposed passenger service restoration on the Gulf Coast—the first hearing of its kind under 49 U.S.C. § 24308(e).
• Landmark Rail Merger – Canadian Pacific & Kansas City Southern (STB Finance Docket No. 36500): Represented a client in regulatory proceedings related to the high-profile merger between Canadian Pacific Railway and Kansas City Southern Railway—one of the most significant North American rail transactions in the last decade.

Notable Appellate and Constitutional Litigation

• Grand Trunk Corp. v. STB, 4th Cir. (2025): Successfully secured a precedent-setting appellate decision vacating a Surface Transportation Board (STB) rule that would have created a new legal avenue for shippers to demand forced reciprocal switching. The court found the rule unlawful, preserving key operational protections for rail carriers.
• Norfolk Southern Ry. Co. v. State Corp. Commission, Virginia Supreme Court (2025): Achieved a major constitutional victory on behalf of Norfolk Southern, with the Virginia Supreme Court striking down a state crossings statute that allowed private parties to seize railroad property. The ruling reaffirmed fundamental property rights under state law.
• Union Pacific Railroad, 8th Cir. (2024): Prevailed in a challenge to federal regulators’ refusal to license the use of international crews at the U.S./Mexico border. After opening briefs, the federal government relented and bolstered cross-border operational rights.
• CSX Transportation, 11th Cir.: CSX in an appeal before the Eleventh Circuit involving the STB’s revocation of a trail-use permit under the Rails-to-Trails program—a case with wide-ranging implications for rail corridor preservation and reactivation (pending).
• Association of American Railroads, 4th Cir.: Counsel to the AAR in an important federal preemption and standing case, appealing a district court decision that denied the association standing to challenge a discriminatory state law targeting the rail industry (pending).
• Skidmore v. Norfolk Southern Ry., 4th Cir. (2021): Persuaded the Fourth Circuit that a state tort claim for adverse possession of railroad property was completely preempted by federal law, enabling removal to federal court and reinforcing the preemptive force of national rail policy.
• BNSF Ry. Co. v. California Dept. of Tax & Fee Admin., 9th Cir. (2018): Successfully upheld a preliminary injunction blocking a state-imposed hazmat fee on rail carriers. The Ninth Circuit affirmed that the fee violated federal law governing rail transportation, protecting railroad clients from discriminatory financial burdens.
• State v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., Illinois Supreme Court (2018): Secured a reversal from the Illinois Supreme Court, which held that a state blocked-crossing statute was unconstitutional under federal law as applied to railroads. The decision reinforced the supremacy of federal law in regulating rail operations.

Investigations and Federal Rulemakings

• United States v. Norfolk Southern – DOJ Litigation: Representing Norfolk Southern in a case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice over whether the company’s service to Amtrak complies with federal statutory “preference” requirements. The case is the first of its kind since the 1970s and presents a novel issue of first impression regarding the legal definition and scope of preference rights—a matter of national significance with potentially far-reaching implications for the freight and passenger rail interface (pending).
• Union Pacific – NEPA Investigation: Defending Union Pacific in a Surface Transportation Board (STB) investigation regarding alleged anticipatory demolition activities under the National Environmental Policy Act (pending).
• Post-Pandemic Freight Rail Service Oversight (STB Docket No. EP 770, Sub-No. 1): Participated in regulatory hearings focused on service and logistics issues emerging in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, advising clients on responsive reporting and performance frameworks.
• Reciprocal Switching Rulemaking (STB Docket No. EP 711, Sub-No. 1): Advised rail carriers in response to a high-impact regulatory proposal that would impose forced competitive access obligations—a transformative rule with major operational and legal consequences for the rail industry (pending).
• Reverse Demurrage Petition (STB Docket No. EP 768): Counsel to carriers opposing a proposed rule that would mandate railroads pay financial penalties (reverse demurrage) for delayed private railcar shipments—a potentially precedent-setting cost-shifting proposal (pending).
• Final Offer Rate Review Proposal (STB Docket No. EP 755): Advised freight railroads in opposition to an agency proposal to establish a formal final-offer rate review mechanism—a process change that could have significantly alter rate dispute adjudications.
• Voluntary Arbitration Framework (STB Docket No. EP 765): Representing a coalition of four carriers in jointly proposing a voluntary arbitration program designed to resolve small rate disputes efficiently, without formal litigation (pending).
• Revenue Adequacy Benchmarking (STB Docket No. EP 766): Co-authored a joint petition proposing a modernized, benchmarking-based methodology for determining the financial health of rail carriers—a policy-shaping initiative with industry-wide implications.
• Train Crew Size Safety Regulations (FRA Docket ID: FRA-2021-0032): Engaged in rulemaking proceedings concerning proposals to mandate two-person crews on freight locomotives, raising key issues of operational flexibility and safety oversight.
• Rail Cost of Capital Methodology (STB Docket No. EP 664, Sub-No. 4): Lead counsel in technical rulemaking proceedings to revise how the STB calculates the railroad industry’s cost of capital, including the use of Capital Asset Pricing Models and multi-stage Discounted Cash Flow Models.

• American Bar Association
• Association of Transportation Law Professionals
• District of Columbia Bar
• Federal Bar Association