The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against Rockland and Orange counties in their lawsuit challenging New York City’s congestion-pricing program. The court upheld the dismissal of the counties' claims that the toll imposed on vehicles entering Manhattan is an unauthorized tax and violates constitutional rights. This ruling affects residents of these counties who commute to the city, as they will continue to face the toll without relief from the courts.
The congestion-pricing program, established under the Traffic Mobility Act of 2019, charges a toll for vehicles entering the Central Business District (CBD) in Midtown and Lower Manhattan. The counties argued that the toll represents an unauthorized tax, restricts the right to travel, and violates various constitutional clauses. However, the district court dismissed the counties' claims, leading to the appeal now decided by the Second Circuit.
Background
The plaintiffs in this case are the County of Rockland, its County Executive Edwin J. Day, the Legislature of Rockland County, and the County of Orange along with its County Executive Steven M. Neuhaus. They filed a lawsuit against the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority (TBTA) and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in 2024, prior to the implementation of the congestion-pricing program.
The counties describe themselves as “transit deserts,” lacking sufficient mass transit options for residents commuting to Manhattan. They claim that the toll disproportionately affects their residents, who rely heavily on driving due to limited public transportation. The counties sought a declaration that the toll is an unauthorized tax and an injunction to stop its implementation.
The Ruling
The Second Circuit, in its ruling on July 13, 2026, affirmed the district court's decision to dismiss the counties' claims. The court stated, “The Program does not create invidious distinctions among drivers or impose more than a minor restriction on the right to travel, so we review only for reasonableness.” The judges concluded that the toll is rationally related to New York’s legitimate interests in reducing traffic congestion and funding mass transit projects.
Furthermore, the court found that the counties failed to demonstrate that the toll constitutes an excessive fine or an unauthorized tax. The judges noted, “Rockland County does not plausibly allege that the toll is an unconstitutionally excessive fine.” The court also upheld the district court's decision to deny the counties the opportunity to amend their complaints.
Impact
This ruling is significant as it sets a precedent for how congestion pricing programs can be legally challenged. The court's decision reinforces the legality of tolls as user fees rather than taxes, which could affect similar programs in other cities. Residents of Rockland and Orange counties will continue to face the toll without any legal recourse through this lawsuit.
The ruling also emphasizes the court's deference to government measures aimed at reducing congestion and funding public transit, suggesting that similar challenges may face hurdles in the future. The decision indicates that courts may be reluctant to intervene in matters that involve government policy aimed at managing urban traffic and transit funding.
What's Next
The counties may consider further legal action, but the options appear limited given the court's clear ruling. There are no related cases pending that would directly affect this ruling, and any appeal to a higher court would need to present new arguments or evidence to succeed.