Body
A federal judge blocked President Donald Trump’s administration from ending New York’s congestion toll for most vehicles driving into Manhattan south of Central Park, ruling that the U.S. Department of Transportation overstepped its authority when it tried to reverse prior federal approval. U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman issued the decision Tuesday, according to the Associated Press, finding that the department could not unilaterally rescind the toll after it had been approved to begin.
In Liman’s 149-page ruling, he rejected the Trump administration’s effort to stop the program by pointing to the agency’s failure to justify the reversal under federal administrative-law standards, the AP reported. The judge concluded the department’s move was “unlawful,” and wrote that the Transportation Secretary’s actions were “arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law,” referring to Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
The court sided with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which had argued that the U.S. DOT’s reversal lacked an adequate explanation. Liman also noted that New York’s Legislature passed the toll, Hochul signed it into law, and the measure received the necessary federal approvals before it began, the AP said. Liman added that “The democratic process worked,” while leaving “the door open” for future efforts by Trump and other opponents to kill the program.
The congestion toll took effect on Jan. 5, 2025, after New York’s planned rollout had been paused and then restarted the year before, according to the AP report. Hochul, a vocal supporter of the program, had paused the planned rollout in 2024 in a move widely seen as aimed at helping suburban Democrats in congressional races where the toll was divisive, before reinstating it after the election and lowering it from $15 to $9.
During the Trump administration, Duffy had rescinded the federal approval for the toll in February, the AP reported, saying the fee was “a slap in the face to working-class Americans and small business owners” and threatening to withhold federal funding for projects in New York if the toll was discontinued. Liman had temporarily blocked the administration from carrying out those threats before issuing his final decision.
After Liman’s ruling, Hochul said the decision vindicates what she called a “once-in-a-lifetime success story” that has “yielded huge benefits” in its first year, including reducing gridlock and unlocking funding for mass transit, according to the AP. A statement from the Democrat included the view that the judge’s decision meant “Congestion pricing is legal, it works, and it is here to stay.”
The U.S. DOT said it was reviewing its legal options, including appealing the ruling, the AP reported. The department also argued that “working-class Americans are being sidelined” under Hochul’s policies, calling the toll a “massive tax on every New Yorker,” while the MTA and its leadership maintained that the program met its goals.
The AP report said the toll applies to most vehicles entering Manhattan south of Central Park and is charged in addition to bridge and tunnel tolls drivers already pay. It varies by vehicle type and time of day but generally costs about $9. The MTA said its analysis of the first year showed about 27 million fewer vehicles coming into the heart of Manhattan, along with reductions in air pollution and faster commute times for drivers who choose to pay the fee, and that the toll generated more than $550 million for the transit system.
Janno Lieber, the MTA’s CEO, said in a statement that “Traffic is down, business is up, and we’re making crucial investments in a transit system that moves millions of people a day,” adding, “New York is winning.”
The legal fight over congestion pricing has also included earlier lawsuits by local opponents, the AP reported, including New Jersey’s governor, unionized teachers in New York City, a trucking industry group and local suburban leaders. Liman’s ruling blocks the administration from pursuing the specific plan to halt the toll through the federal approval reversal pathway that the judge found unlawful, while still acknowledging that other future efforts could follow.