
Can Trump Still Kill Congestion Pricing After U.S. Lawyers Showed Doubt?
The Trump administration inadvertently showed its cards when its own lawyers released a confidential document expressing grave doubts about their legal fight with New York to end congestion pricing.
But does that mean Washington's whole case will go bust?
It started when lawyers representing the U.S. Department of Transportation filed a detailed memo in federal court that laid out why the agency was likely to lose. The memo, which should not have been filed because it is subject to attorney-client privilege, was on the docket for less than an hour Wednesday night before it was pulled.
But by Thursday morning, the letter had been widely shared online. Hours later, the agency effectively fired its legal team of lawyers from the U.S. attorney's office for the Southern District of New York after suggesting that the disclosure may have been politically-motivated sabotage. A spokesman for the Southern District said the disclosure was an accident.
It is now up to a federal judge whether the 11-page letter, which provides a road map for blowing up the Transportation Department's legal defense, should be permanently sealed and excluded from the court proceedings.
On Thursday, backers of congestion pricing asked the court whether the letter might be unsealed and made part of the case. Some legal observers said, however, that whatever the court decides about the letter, the better question is whether the damage is already done.
'The cat's out of the bag,' said Michael Gerrard, a professor at Columbia Law School who supports congestion pricing. 'Everyone knows the contents of the letter, regardless of whether it's sealed.'
In February, the transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, said his agency was withdrawing approval for the plan, which had been authorized by the Biden administration. He demanded that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which operates congestion pricing, stop the tolls. The M.T.A. immediately sued in federal court to prevent Mr. Duffy's intervention. Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York vowed to keep the toll cameras on.
Mr. Duffy has said congestion pricing goes beyond the scope of the federal program used to authorize it — known as the Value Pricing Pilot Program — because it does not offer a toll-free option for drivers entering the area. He has also argued that revenue from the toll should not be used to subsidize mass transit projects.
But the confidential memo, written by three assistant U.S. attorneys in Manhattan representing the Transportation Department, warned that Mr. Duffy's arguments were 'exceedingly likely' to fail in court.
The lawyers said that neither of Mr. Duffy's arguments were likely to persuade the court, partly because the federal judge overseeing the M.T.A.'s lawsuit, Lewis J. Liman, had recently dismissed elements of those theories in other cases related to congestion pricing. The government's lawyers instead urged a new direction.
In response to the letter becoming public, the Transportation Department made the remarkable decision to remove those lawyers from the case and released a statement suggesting that the team was either incompetent or motivated by politics. The lawyers, however, apologized in a letter to the judge and asked that the file be sealed.
Mr. Duffy and the Transportation Department will now be represented by lawyers from the civil division of the Department of Justice in Washington, a team that will have to work quickly to get up to speed on the case.
In a news media interview on Thursday, Mr. Duffy downplayed the release of the memo, adding that he remained confident in his department's legal strategy. He said that the congestion pricing toll remains 'fundamentally unfair.'
A spokeswoman for the agency on Friday said there would be 'no change in Secretary Duffy's fight to terminate the congestion pricing program.' Mr. Duffy has already threatened to withhold federal funding and approval for a number of transportation projects in the city and state, if Ms. Hochul does not comply with his demands.
Judge Liman is expected to decide after next week whether the memo should be included in the case. Supporters of congestion pricing, including two nonprofits involved with the lawsuit, have questioned whether it makes sense to seal the document.
'Once it is public, it necessarily remains public,' Dror Ladin, a lawyer representing the supporters, wrote in his letter to the court.
The release of the memo was the latest setback for Mr. Duffy, who has sought to halt congestion pricing despite a chorus of legal experts who have said his agency lacks the authority to do so.
The congestion pricing program, the first of its kind in the nation, charges most drivers $9 to enter Manhattan below 60th Street during peak traffic, to cut down on gridlock and pollution and raise funds for the region's mass transit system. After years of federal, state and local review, the plan was approved under the Biden administration in November 2024, and tolling began on Jan 5.
President Trump has promised to end the toll, arguing, without evidence, that it would harm the local economy.
The disclosure of the memo, while embarrassing and 'a lawyer's nightmare,' was unlikely to be a deciding factor in the M.T.A.'s lawsuit, said Eric A. Goldstein, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, which supports congestion pricing.
Mr. Goldstein added that very little in the memo was new or surprising, and that Judge Liman was already well versed on the issue after presiding over four other congestion pricing cases brought by opponents.
One telling detail to emerge from the letter, however, was that the Department of Transportation might try to terminate its approval of congestion pricing by citing 'changed agency priorities.'
But, for that argument to prevail, the judge would have to agree that the federal government can renege on commitments made by a previous administration, said Joe Carlile, an appropriations consultant and former associate director at the Office of Management and Budget during the Biden administration.
'I don't know if it's an open-and-shut case, one way or the other,' Mr. Carlile said, adding that if this strategy works, it could have a chilling effect on private sector investment in government projects.
'That would throw long-term capital projects into disarray,' he said.
Several lawyers said the Trump administration could still prevail against the tolling program in court, though not necessarily before Judge Liman.
Corey Bearak, a lawyer who advises clients on public policy issues and opposes congestion pricing, said that mistakes happen and that by replacing the lawyers in the case, the Trump administration had sent a message 'that they are serious about the litigation.' He urged the Trump administration to consider other legal avenues, including joining efforts by opponents who are also fighting congestion pricing in state court.
Brian D. Carr, a lawyer for the Trucking Association of New York, which filed one of the lawsuits opposing congestion pricing before Judge Liman, said he has not read the memo out of principle. He said he has previously received a confidential email from other lawyers by mistake that might have helped his case.
'I immediately delete it because there but for the grace of God go I,' he said. 'I would hope that I would get the same respect from an adversary.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Boston Globe
6 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Is Trump's troop deployment in LA a prelude to martial law?
Neither did Hegseth announced that National Guard members and the Marines will stay in Los Angeles for Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up At a Advertisement This is a Trump made-for-TV spectacle of authoritarianism disguised as law and order. It's likely a prelude to martial law. Rob Bonta, California's attorney general, is Advertisement Protests were sparked last week after Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials conducted several workplace raids in Los Angeles, including a But what began as boisterous but peaceful protests against Trump's anti-immigrant scheme which now demands 'If I didn't ''SEND IN THE TROOPS,'" Trump said Tuesday on social media, Los Angeles 'would be burning to the ground right now,' before he disparaged Bass and Newsom. Yes, there has been looting, and some cars have been burned and vandalized. But Trump is lying about the extent of lawlessness. Trump is following his bad policies with even worse provocations that could portend a modern-day Kent State tragedy with soldiers firing live bullets at protesters. But for Trump, the more chaos, the better. As a White House official said, 'We're happy to have this fight.' To some extent this fight to suppress dissent has been boiling in Trump for five years. During nationwide demonstrations after the police murder of George Floyd in 2020, Trump, then in his first term, asked members of his Cabinet whether protesters could be shot. 'He thought that the protests made the country look weak, made us look weak, and 'us' meant him,' Mark Esper, Trump's former defense secretary, Advertisement Esper recalled Trump saying to now-retired General Mark Milley, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, ''Can't you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?' … It was a suggestion and a formal question. And we were just all taken aback at that moment as this issue just hung very heavily in the air.' Ultimately, Trump was talked out of it. That won't happen this time, with an administration packed with people whose only loyalty is to him, not to the Constitution or rule of law. After Tom Homan, Trump's bloviating border czar, If not for the ICE arrest of But not now. Everything in Trump's second administration is designed to codify his authoritarianism. If Trump can convince enough people, especially among his white base, that he alone represents the thin orange line between civilization — as Advertisement Right now, the administration claims the military is in Los Angeles to protect federal buildings and assets — theoretically. Trump has not invoked the Insurrection Act, but neither has he ruled out unleashing US troops on protesters. With his draconian policies, Trump has lit the fuse for what could be a long and difficult summer of protests. With an occupying military force in this nation's second largest city, he has declared war against America itself. Renée Graham is a Globe columnist. She can be reached at


New York Post
6 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump promised not to send in military to tamp down on NYC protests — if NYPD keeps demonstrators in line
President Trump promised NYPD brass over the weekend that he will not send in the military or National Guard to tamp down on anti-ICE protests in New York City — as long as cops keep the demonstrators in line, The Post has learned. Trump's pledge was made to Deputy Mayor of Public Safety Kaz Daughtry and NYPD Chief of Department John Chell as the pair palled around with the president at his New Jersey golf club. Sources with knowledge of the meeting said Trump had voiced concerns over the destructive mass protests engulfing Los Angeles and them being replicated in the Big Apple. Advertisement But Chell reassured the president that any demonstrations in the city would not get out of hand, the sources said. Kaz Daughtry and John Chell though didn't tee it up with the commander in chief. Linkedin/john-chell The two Big Apple police officials met with Trump on Sunday. Linkedin/john-chell Advertisement Trump then told the two he didn't believe the National Guard would be necessary in New York City. It came after he ordered an initial 2,000 National Guard troops to LA Saturday amid the raging protests over federal immigration enforcement raids. Since then, the Trump administration has in total dispatched roughly 4,000 National Guard members and 700 Marines to the city– sparking an emergency request by California Gov. Gavin Newsom Tuesday for a federal court to block the deployment. On Monday, Mayor Eric Adams and his police commissioner, Jessica Tisch, decried the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles and issued a stern warning to New Yorkers to not follow suit. 'The escalation of protests in Los Angeles over the last couple of days is unacceptable and would not be tolerated if attempted in our city,' Adams said. Advertisement Tisch added that 'any attacks against law enforcement will be met with a swift and decisive response from the NYPD.' Earlier Monday, dozens of protestors calling for an end to the ICE raids were arrested at Trump Tower after refusing to leave the Manhattan high-rise. The meeting between Trump and Adams' allies raised eyebrows in New York City political circles — after Daughtry and Chell posted photos on social media from the Bedminster club. 'Great day on the links today with POTUS, #45-#47 – Donald J. Trump. Good conversation with a few laughs and a great lunch. Deputy Mayor of Public Safety Kaz Daughtry and I were grateful for the invite,' Chell wrote. Advertisement Sources said the two Big Apple officials didn't actually tee it up with the prez, despite the photos showing them chatting with him on the links. Still, Adams defended the outing on Tuesday, telling reporters, 'A lot of great deals have been made on the golf course.' 'I thank the two of them for doing it,' he said. 'Many of you who play golf know that great decisions are made on the golf course.' Both Chell and Daughtry also joined the mayor at Trump's inauguration earlier this year.
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
IQVIA Holdings (NYSE:IQV) Sees 11% Share Price Rise Over Last Week
IQVIA Holdings experienced a 10% rise in share price over the last week, correlating with its recent developments, notably the dosing of the first patient in the RENEW Phase 2 trial and its strategic alliance with Sarah Cannon Research Institute to optimize oncology trials. These initiatives likely provided a positive sentiment boost, aligning well with the broader market momentum, as indices such as the S&P 500 also reached new highs. The market's anticipation over US-China trade talks and overall strong corporate earnings have supported the upward trend, further enhancing IQV's market performance. We've identified 1 warning sign for IQVIA Holdings that you should be aware of. Uncover 18 companies that survived and thrived after COVID and have the right ingredients to survive Trump's tariffs. The recent 10% rise in IQVIA Holdings' share price has been influenced by important developments like the dosing in the RENEW Phase 2 trial and a key alliance with Sarah Cannon Research Institute. These initiatives are expected to potentially drive revenue growth, particularly as the strategic alliance optimizes oncology trials. The company's past performance, with total returns of 10.45% over five years, suggests modest growth in investor value. However, compared to the US Life Sciences industry's one-year return of 27% decline, IQVIA's recent rise highlights positive market sentiment. These initiatives, combined with FDA reforms and NVIDIA collaboration, may lower operational costs and have a favorable impact on earnings forecasts. Analysts predict revenue to grow by 5.2% annually over the next three years, which is somewhat cautious compared to the general expectations for the life sciences sector. The recent share price movement to US$146.2 remains below the consensus price target of US$216.31, indicating potential for future appreciation if the projected growth in revenue and earnings materializes. Click here to discover the nuances of IQVIA Holdings with our detailed analytical financial health report. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include NYSE:IQV. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data