A U.S. federal judge on Monday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from withholding transportation funds from New York over the state’s controversial congestion pricing program, siding with state and city officials who argued the move was politically motivated and legally flawed.
U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman in Manhattan granted a temporary restraining order barring the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) from rescinding prior federal approvals or delaying funds for projects tied to the congestion pricing plan. The ruling came as New York officials ramped up legal efforts to preserve the initiative, which aims to reduce traffic and generate billions for public transit upgrades.
The congestion pricing system, slated to go into effect in June, would charge most passenger vehicles $15 to enter Manhattan’s central business district during peak hours. It marks the first such program in the United States and is modeled on similar systems in London and Singapore.
In February, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced that the administration would revoke the federal environmental clearance granted under the Biden administration, claiming the program did not adequately account for its economic burden on drivers from outer boroughs and neighboring states. The administration also threatened to withhold funding for unrelated infrastructure projects if the plan was not paused.
New York Governor Kathy Hochul and New York City officials called the move an overreach and filed a lawsuit earlier this month to block the administration’s efforts, calling them “arbitrary and capricious” under federal law.
In Monday’s ruling, Judge Liman said New York had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and would suffer “irreparable harm” without immediate court intervention. He set a hearing for later this summer to determine whether a longer-term injunction should be issued.
The USDOT did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The ruling is the latest clash between the Trump administration and Democratic-led states over urban environmental and transportation policy. Legal experts expect the case could set a precedent for future federal-state conflicts involving local climate and transit initiatives.
NYC Journals 