Gov. Kathy Hochul faces two new lawsuits over congestion pricing, this time from groups opposed to her pause of the plan.

The lawsuits are being backed by a coalition of legal experts and special interest groups brought together by City Comptroller Brad Lander last month.


What You Need To Know

  • Gov. Kathy Hochul faces two new lawsuits over congestion pricing, this time from groups opposed to her pause of the plan

  • The lawsuits are being backed by a coalition of legal experts and special interest groups brought together by City Comptroller Brad Lander last month

  • The first lawsuit, from the good government group the City Club of New York, claims the Traffic Mobility Act, which established congestion pricing, did not give the governor a role in implementing it

  • The second lawsuit, led by the environmental litigation nonprofit Earthjustice and Riders Alliance, claims the governor is violating an environmental law that requires government officials’ actions to advance climate goals. It also claims her action violates state residents’ rights to clean air and water, under a recent change to the state constitution

According to the coalition, the goal of the lawsuits is to force the governor to implement congestion pricing, which would have started on June 30.

The plan would have charged $15 to most drivers who drive below 60th Street during peak hours, with a goal of raising $15 billion for the MTA’s capital plan. The MTA has put on hold $16.5 billion in planned upgrades since the pause.

The first lawsuit, from the good government group the City Club of New York, claims the Traffic Mobility Act, which established congestion pricing, did not give the governor a role in implementing it.

“It doesn’t say that Gov. Hochul gets to decide when congestion pricing is to begin. She doesn’t. That’s the MTA,’ said Andrew Celli, an attorney for the City Club of New York. “And it doesn’t say that Gov. Hochul’s transportation commissioner, who we also sued, can stall congestion pricing indefinitely by the bureaucratic trick by refusing to sign her name on a routine document.”

The second lawsuit, led by the environmental litigation nonprofit Earthjustice and Riders Alliance, claims the governor is violating an environmental law that requires government officials’ actions to advance climate goals. It also claims her action violates state residents’ rights to clean air and water, under a recent change to the state constitution.

“Gov. Hochul may dislike congestion pricing. She may fail to grasp the threats of climate change or our need for a reliable accessible transit system. But congestion pricing, the Green Amendment and the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act are still the law, no matter what a small set of wealthy, influential special interests might tell her at the expense of millions of hardworking New Yorkers,” Betsy Plum, executive director of the Riders Alliance, said at a news briefing Thursday.

A spokesperson for Hochul said in a statement, "Get in line. There are now 11 separate congestion pricing lawsuits filed by groups trying to weaponize the judicial system to score political points, but Gov. Hochul remains focused on what matters: funding transit, reducing congestion, and protecting working New Yorkers."

Lander is not a plaintiff in the lawsuits, and he said the city is not paying any money for them.

“Each of them makes clear unequivocally that the governor’s halt of congestion pricing is in contradiction of New York State law,” Lander said at the news briefing. “And if either suit is resolved in our favor, it would compel the implementation of congestion pricing and that would deliver the transit improvements the more frequent, accessible subway system, the faster buses, the cleaner air and the smoother traffic that every single New Yorker deserves.”

According to Lander, there may be at least one other lawsuit based on possible violations of the rights of disability groups, since the MTA had to put accessibility upgrades on hold at 23 stations after the pause was announced.

Lander said a change in the presidential administration in January could result in the federal Department of Transportation decision to revoke the documents needed to implement the program.

Editor's Note: A previous version of the story misstated the agency that could revoke the documents needed to implement the program.