
Can Trump Still Kill Congestion Pricing After U.S. Lawyers Showed Doubt?
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


San Francisco Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Asian shares are mixed, tracking Wall Street split as momentum slows and Tesla drops
MANILA, Philippines (AP) — Asian shares were mixed on Wednesday following a similar drift overnight on Wall Street as losses for Tesla and other technology shares put a brake on the momentum of recent record highs. U.S. futures edged higher and oil prices were little changed. Shares fell in Japan, hit by jitters over a lack of progress in trade talks with the U.S., but they recovered much of their lost ground, trading 0.3% lower at 39,874.33. Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, pointed to President Donald Trump's declaration that there will be no extension of his tariff pause, which ends on July 9. 'The message was blunt: if Tokyo won't yield, it will pay. Tariffs of 30%, 35% or 'whatever number we determine' are now openly back on the table,' he said. 'The negotiating table just became a pressure cooker.' Hong Kong's Hang Seng advanced 0.6% to 24,220.65 and the Shanghai Composite index was down just over 1 point at 3,456.51. Australia's S&P ASX 200 edged up 0.4% to 8,580.70. On Tuesday, the S&P 500 dipped 0.1% to 6,198.01 for its first loss in four days. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.9% to 44,494.94, and the Nasdaq composite fell 0.8% to 20,202.89. Tesla tugged on the market as the relationship between its CEO, Elon Musk, and President Donald Trump soured even further. Once allies, the two have clashed recently, and Trump suggested there's potentially 'BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED' by scrutinizing subsidies, contracts or other government spending going to Musk's companies. Tesla fell 5.3%. It has lost just over a quarter of its value so far this year, 25.5%, in large part because of Musk's and Trump's feud. Drops for several darlings of the artificial-intelligence frenzy also weighed on the market. Nvidia's decline of 3% was the heaviest weight on the S&P 500. But more stocks within the index rose than fell, led by several casino companies. They rallied following a report showing better-than-expected growth in overall gaming revenue in Macao, China's casino hub. Las Vegas Sands gained 8.9%, Wynn Resorts climbed 8.8% and MGM Resorts International rose 7.3%. Automakers outside of Tesla were also strong, with General Motors up 5.7% and Ford Motor up 4.6%. The U.S. stock market has made a stunning recovery from its springtime sell-off of roughly 20%. But challenges still lie ahead for Wall Street, with one of the largest being the continued threat of Trump's tariffs. Many of Trump's stiff proposed taxes on imports are currently on pause, and they're scheduled to kick into effect in about a week. Depending on how big they are, they could hurt the economy and worsen inflation. Washington is also making progress on proposed cuts to tax rates and other measures that could send the U.S. government's debt spiraling higher, which could raise inflation. That in turn could mean higher interest rates, which would hurt prices for bonds, stocks and other investments. Despite such challenges, strategists at Barclays say they see signals of euphoria among some investors. The strategists say a measure that tries to show how much 'excess optimism' is in the market is not far from the peaks seen during the 'meme stock' craze that sent GameStop to market-bending heights or to the dot-com bubble at the turn of the millennium. In other dealings early Wednesday, benchmark U.S. crude gained 1 cent to $65.46 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, rose 5 cents per barrel to $67.16.

30 minutes ago
Asian shares are mixed, tracking Wall Street split as momentum slows and Tesla drops
MANILA, Philippines -- Asian shares were mixed on Wednesday following a similar drift overnight on Wall Street as losses for Tesla and other technology shares put a brake on the momentum of recent record highs. U.S. futures edged higher and oil prices were little changed. Shares fell in Japan, hit by jitters over a lack of progress in trade talks with the U.S., but they recovered much of their lost ground, trading 0.3% lower at 39,874.33. Stephen Innes, managing partner at SPI Asset Management, pointed to President Donald Trump's declaration that there will be no extension of his tariff pause, which ends on July 9. 'The message was blunt: if Tokyo won't yield, it will pay. Tariffs of 30%, 35% or 'whatever number we determine' are now openly back on the table,' he said. 'The negotiating table just became a pressure cooker.' Hong Kong's Hang Seng advanced 0.6% to 24,220.65 and the Shanghai Composite index was down just over 1 point at 3,456.51. South Korea's KOSPI fell 1.2% to 3,053.39 as inflation rose in June. Australia's S&P ASX 200 edged up 0.4% to 8,580.70. On Tuesday, the S&P 500 dipped 0.1% to 6,198.01 for its first loss in four days. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 0.9% to 44,494.94, and the Nasdaq composite fell 0.8% to 20,202.89. Tesla tugged on the market as the relationship between its CEO, Elon Musk, and President Donald Trump soured even further. Once allies, the two have clashed recently, and Trump suggested there's potentially 'BIG MONEY TO BE SAVED' by scrutinizing subsidies, contracts or other government spending going to Musk's companies. Tesla fell 5.3%. It has lost just over a quarter of its value so far this year, 25.5%, in large part because of Musk's and Trump's feud. Drops for several darlings of the artificial-intelligence frenzy also weighed on the market. Nvidia's decline of 3% was the heaviest weight on the S&P 500. But more stocks within the index rose than fell, led by several casino companies. They rallied following a report showing better-than-expected growth in overall gaming revenue in Macao, China's casino hub. Las Vegas Sands gained 8.9%, Wynn Resorts climbed 8.8% and MGM Resorts International rose 7.3%. Automakers outside of Tesla were also strong, with General Motors up 5.7% and Ford Motor up 4.6%. The U.S. stock market has made a stunning recovery from its springtime sell-off of roughly 20%. But challenges still lie ahead for Wall Street, with one of the largest being the continued threat of Trump's tariffs. Many of Trump's stiff proposed taxes on imports are currently on pause, and they're scheduled to kick into effect in about a week. Depending on how big they are, they could hurt the economy and worsen inflation. Washington is also making progress on proposed cuts to tax rates and other measures that could send the U.S. government's debt spiraling higher, which could raise inflation. That in turn could mean higher interest rates, which would hurt prices for bonds, stocks and other investments. Despite such challenges, strategists at Barclays say they see signals of euphoria among some investors. The strategists say a measure that tries to show how much 'excess optimism' is in the market is not far from the peaks seen during the 'meme stock' craze that sent GameStop to market-bending heights or to the dot-com bubble at the turn of the millennium. In other dealings early Wednesday, benchmark U.S. crude gained 1 cent to $65.46 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, rose 5 cents per barrel to $67.16. The U.S. dollar rose to 143.58 Japanese yen from 143.41 yen. The euro slid to $1.1798 from $1.1808. ___

41 minutes ago
Trump says the GOP mega bill will eliminate taxes on Social Security. It does not.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump keeps saying that Republicans' mega tax and spending cut legislation will eliminate taxes on federal Social Security benefits. It does not. At best, Trump's 'no tax on Social Security' claim exaggerates the benefits to seniors if either the House or Senate-passed proposals is signed into law. Here's a look at Trump's recent statements, and what the proposals would — or would not — do. Trump repeatedly told voters during his 2024 campaign that he would eliminate taxes on Social Security. As his massive legislative package has moved through Congress, the Republican president has claimed that's what the bill would do. Trump said on a recent appearance on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures" that the bill includes 'no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime.' But instead of eliminating the tax, the Senate and House have each passed their own versions of a temporary tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and over, which applies to all income — not just Social Security. And it turns out not all Social Security beneficiaries will be able to claim the deduction. Those who won't be able to do so include the lowest-income seniors who already don't pay taxes on Social Security, those who choose to claim their benefits before they reach age 65 and those above a defined income threshold. The Senate proposal includes a temporary $6,000 deduction for seniors over the age of 65, contrasted with the House proposal, which includes a temporary deduction of $4,000. The Senate proposal approved Tuesday would eliminate Social Security tax liability for seniors with adjusted gross incomes of $75,000 or less or $150,000 if filing as a married couple. If passed into law, the tax deduction would last four years, from 2025 to 2029. The deductions phase out as income increases. Touting a new Council of Economic Advisers analysis, the White House said Tuesday that '88% of all seniors who receive Social Security — will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits," going on to say that the Senate proposal's $6,000 senior deduction 'is estimated to benefit 33.9 million seniors, including seniors not claiming Social Security. The deduction yields an average increase in after-tax income of $670 per senior who benefits from it.' Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation think tank, said conflating the tax deduction with a claim that there will be no tax on Social Security could end up confusing and angering a lot of seniors who will expect to not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. 'While the deduction does provide some relief for seniors, it's far from completely repealing the tax on their benefits,' Watson said. The cost of actually eliminating the tax on Social Security would have massive impacts on the economy. University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that eliminating income taxes on Social Security benefits 'would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion over 10 years and increase federal debt by 7 percent by 2054" and speed up the projected depletion date of the Social Security Trust Fund from 2034 to 2032. Discussions over taxes on Social Security are just part of the overall bill, which is estimated in its Senate version to increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Administration officials have said the cost of the tax bill would be offset by tariff income. Recently, the CBO separately estimated that Trump's sweeping tariff plan would cut deficits by $2.8 trillion over a 10-year period while shrinking the economy, raising the inflation rate and reducing the purchasing power of households overall.