Trump kills NYC congestion pricing program: report
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy — in a letter posted by the New York Post before it was sent to Gov. Hochul — said that he was revoking the federal government's authorization for the program under the so-called the Value Pricing Pilot Program, an authorization that was given by the Biden DOT in December.
It was not immediately clear how or when his action would affect the ongoing program which most drivers are paying $9 a day for driving in the congestion zone south of 60th Street in Manhattan.
'The revenues generated under this pilot program are directed toward the transit system as opposed to the highways,' Duffy wrote — expressing the whole point of congestion pricing. 'I do not believe that this is a fair deal.'
'I have concluded that the scope of this pilot project as approved exceeds the authority authorized by congress under the VPPP,' he said.
The Value Pricing Pilot Program agreement, signed in the waning days of 2024 by the state, local and federal departments of transportation, was the final sign-off required to authorize congestion pricing.
In a statement, the federal DOT argued that Congestion Pricing was not allowed because it did not do enough to curb congestion.
'The toll rate was set primarily to raise revenue for transit, rather than at an amount needed to reduce congestion,' read a statement released by the department. 'By doing so, the pilot runs contrary to the purpose of the VPPP, which is to impose tolls for congestion reduction – not transit revenue generation.'
It was not immediately clear what legal authority the Trump administration might have to renege on the December agreement.
A Hochul spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Letitia James' political crusade against Donald Trump was an abomination of the law
New York Attorney General Letitia James is going to need a bigger fish or a smaller trophy wall. For months, James has paraded her victory over President Donald Trump in her civil judgment of half a trillion dollars. It did not matter that many of us denounced the judgment as grotesque and raw lawfare. Now, however, the appellate court has replaced that mounted Marlin with a mere minnow. It threw out the financial penalty as unconstitutional and unwarranted. Advertisement Even that downsized catch may have to be pulled down, since Trump can appeal the decision to leave the injunctive relief — including limits on doing business in New York — in place. The problem is that this over-stuffed guppy has cost the people of New York tens of millions of dollars in staff, security and other costs. It was all just the cost of doing business with James, who ran on the pledge to bag Trump on something — anything! — if elected. For James, it was worth it. For her base, the case was never about the merits or the law. James offered lawfare against political opponents, and New York Democrats elected her with a gleeful malice. Advertisement They were thrilled as James suggested that she was going to seize Trump buildings after the judgment and sought a massive bond. Notably, even the judges who sided with James on her ability to bring this case were critical of her ethics or judgment in running on bagging an individual on unnamed crimes or civil actions. They simply chose not to do anything about it. That blindness was broken by Judge David Friedman, who, on the appeal, offered an unblinking account of how James abused the legal system. Advertisement 'Plainly, her ultimate goal was not 'market hygiene' . . . but political hygiene, ending with the derailment of President Trump's political career and the destruction of his real estate business. The voters have obviously rendered a verdict on his political career. This bench today unanimously derails the effort to destroy his business.' The five appeals court judges fractured on the rationale for their opinions. Two of the judges — Dianne T. Renwick and Peter H. Moulton — correctly found that 'the court's disgorgement order, which directs that defendants pay nearly half a billion dollars to the State of New York, is an excessive fine that violates the Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution.' The rest of the judges found other reasons to negate the damages while preserving the fraud judgment. In the end, James could not get a single vote on appeal to support Judge Arthur Engoron's ridiculous fine. Engoron, like James, will continue to enjoy the status of a folk hero in New York. But he will go down in history as a judge who yielded to the demands of the mob rather than the law. Advertisement Yet nothing will change. With the exception of Judge Friedman, the mild rebukes of the appellate court of James show how Trump remains persona non grata, a disfavored figure who is entitled to no consideration, let alone sympathy, in New York. The most courage that Judge Moulton could summon was to say, 'One can reasonably question whether a candidate running for the top law enforcement position in statewide government should make such pointed statements.' I suppose one could also reasonably question whether a judge faced with blatant, open targeting of a political opponent should do more than a judicial shrug. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling book 'The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.'
Los Angeles Times
12 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump administration reviewing all 55 million people with U.S. visas for potential deportable violations
WASHINGTON — The State Department said Thursday that it's reviewing the records of more than 55 million foreigners who hold valid U.S. visas for potential revocation or deportable violations of immigration rules. In a written answer to a question posed by the Associated Press, the department said that all U.S. visa holders are subject to 'continuous vetting' with an eye toward any indication that they could be ineligible for the document. Should such information be found, the visa will be revoked and, if the visa holder is in the United States, he or she would be subject to deportation. The department said it was looking for indicators of ineligibility, including visa overstays, criminal activity, threats to public safety, engaging in any form of terrorist activity, or providing support to a terrorist organization. 'We review all available information as part of our vetting, including law enforcement or immigration records or any other information that comes to light after visa issuance indicating a potential ineligibility,' the department said. Since President Trump took office in January, his administration has thus far focused on deporting migrants illegally in the United States as well as holders of student and visitor exchange visas. The State Department's new language suggests that the re-vetting process, which officials acknowledge is time-consuming, is far more widespread. The administration has steadily imposed more and more restrictions and requirements on visa applicants, including requiring all visa seekers to submit to in-person interviews. But the review of all visa holders appears to be a significant expansion of what had initially been a re-vetting process focused mainly on students who have been involved in pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel activity. Officials say the reviews will include all the visa holders' social media accounts, law enforcement and immigration records in their home countries, along with any actionable violations of U.S. law committed while they were in the United States. 'As part of the Trump Administration's commitment to protect U.S. national security and public safety, since Inauguration Day the State Department has revoked more than twice as many visas, including nearly four times as many student visas, as during the same time period last year,' the department said. Earlier this week, the department said that since Trump returned to the White House, it has revoked more than 6,000 student visas for overstays and violations of local, state and federal law, the vast majority of which were assault, driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs and support for terrorism. It said that about 4,000 of those 6,000 were due to actual infractions of laws and that approximately 200–300 visas were revoked for terrorism-related issues, including providing support for designated terrorist organizations or state sponsors of terrorism. Lee writes for the Associated Press.
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump administration launches national security investigation into wind turbine imports
The Trump administration has launched a national security probe into imports of wind turbines and their components – a move that could ultimately lead to higher tariffs for wind energy. The probe, which marks the latest salvo in the administration's efforts to stymie wind energy, was announced in a Federal Register notice on Thursday. 'On August 13, 2025, the Secretary of Commerce initiated an investigation to determine the effects on the national security of imports of wind turbines and their parts and components,' says the notice. It does not explicitly lay out the reasons for or evidence behind the probe, and the Bureau of Industry and Security did not immediately respond to questions from The Hill. But the administration requested information from the public on topics including the role of foreign supply chains, the impact of foreign government subsidies and predatory trade practices and whether there's any ability to weaponize foreign-built wind turbines and their parts. The investigation was initiated under section Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act. Such probes are supposed to determine the national security impacts of imports and allow the administration to make adjustments, including tariffs, based on their results. It comes after the administration already earlier this week increased steel and aluminum tariffs for hundreds of products including wind turbines. The probe was being launched as President Trump continues his efforts to stifle renewable energy buildout, including by repealing subsidies and setting up new hurdles for approval.
