New York’s Congestion Pricing Program Through An Environmental Lens
Isabel Coyle
According to an inventory prepared by the Environmental Protection Agency, transportation accounted for 28 percent of direct greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S in 2022.[1] On January 5, 2025, New York City implemented the “Central Business District Tolling Program,” commonly known as congestion pricing, in order to make progress towards decreasing these emissions.[2] A hotly debated initiative, the program charges a $9 toll for most drivers entering the area of Manhattan at or below 60th street, which is designated as the Congestion Relief Zone.[3]
With the commencement of the program, New York City becomes the first U.S. city to implement a congestion pricing program, following other cities around the world including London, Stockholm, and Singapore.[4] It also joins many cities, mainly outside of the U.S., that have similar programs but which toll or restrict only high-polluting vehicles.[5] Despite its implementation, the fight over the program’s future continues, raising questions about the future of congestion pricing programs in the United States and the limits of the current Administration’s power to stop a program already in effect.[6]
History, Structure, and Purpose
Congestion pricing in New York City has been long in the making. On Earth Day in 2007, former Mayor Bloomberg proposed a congestion pricing program as part of his ambitious PlaNYC for a more sustainable New York City.[7] In order to receive the necessary federal funding, the congestion pricing program had to pass the State Legislature, but it failed despite widespread public support.[8] Congestion pricing was again recommended in 2018 by a commission appointed by former Governor Cuomo with former Mayor de Blasio endorsing the idea, sparking the push for the current program.[9]
The legislation that created the program, entitled the Traffic Mobility Act, directed the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority to establish the program and instructed the Authority to enter a memorandum of understanding with the New York City Department of Transportation.[10] It stated that the memorandum should coordinate the design, planning, installation, maintenance, and construction of the program.[11] The Act described the program’s goals as reducing congestion and “funding capital projects.”[12] It pointed to subway infrastructure failures as having a negative impact on the safety and health of resident New Yorkers, commuters, and tourists and harming local businesses.[13] The legislature also found that New York City’s congestion imposed significant costs on the City and State’s economies and had a significant negative impact on air quality.[14]
Environmental Legal Challenges prior to Implementation
Originally passed in 2019, the Traffic Mobility Act faced a difficult path to implementation.[15] Many early challenges to the Act were based on environmental concerns. The program needed approval from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) because the Act proposed tolls on highways that use federal funds.[16] This approval by a federal agency qualified as a major federal action, which triggered National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review meaning that the FHWA had to conduct a federal environmental review assessing any significant environmental impact of the program.[17] Challenges to the act ensued, including the state of New Jersey’s suit alleging the environmental analysis completed by the FHWA did not adequately take New Jersey’s air quality into account.[18] New Jersey also alleged that the FHWA failed to meet the federal Clean Air Act’s requirement that federal agencies consider the impact of a federal action on a state’s capacity to meet federal air quality standards.[19] Other groups including community groups in lower Manhattan, residents of lower Manhattan, a union coalition, and a group of elected officials from the City and nearby counties made similar allegations about the adequacy of the FHWA’s environmental analysis for specific regions in and around the City.[20]
The FHWA’s environmental assessment (EA) predicted the program would result in changes to travel patterns supporting less congestion and corresponding to improved air quality in the central business district area of Manhattan, with small increases in air pollution in some localized areas outside Manhattan.[21] However, the EA predicted that the change in the amount of traffic and traffic patterns would not have a negative effect on air quality overall.[22] It also noted that the sponsors of the project had committed to $155 million to be spent over five years for the mitigation of any of the project’s negative effects.[23]
The Southern District of New York consolidated four cases including one from New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax and one from the Trucking Association of New York, each requesting a preliminary injunction of the program and each challenging the Act on multiple grounds.[24] The Court denied the injunction requests, stating in regard to the NEPA violation the plaintiffs failed to show that any environmental impact of the program on their communities would exceed a de minimis or minimal amount.[25] In support, the Court cited the FHWA’s conclusion in the EA that the changes in traffic would not lead to local or regional air quality exceeding National Ambient Air Quality standards and would have no negative impact on air quality; the plaintiffs did not contest.[26]
Challenges Post-Implementation
The program has become the subject of President Trump’s attention since the campaign trail.[27] He has expressed his disapproval of the program on numerous occasions, but initially indicated willingness to negotiate with New York Governor Hochul’s office about the future of the program.[28] President Trump has since declared the program dead in a post on social media.[29] In the same social media post, he described his action as saving New York and labeled himself king.[30] President Trump’s Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy, shared that a review of the program, conducted by the Department of Transportation, found that the project’s scope exceeded the authority Congress had authorized for the FHWA.[31] The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has stated it will challenge the Department of Transportation’s reversal by seeking a declaratory judgment and called the effort to stop the program baseless.[32] It cited the long process of implementing the program and extensive environmental review as evidence of the suddenness of the program’s reversal.[33] Governor Hochul has confirmed this challenge.[34]
While the potential environmental benefits of the program are likely not at the forefront of the President’s mind, Governor Hochul has stated that the early results of the program look promising in terms of increased traffic speed and increased ridership on public transportation.[35] The results of the continuing fight will have important implications for the future of potential congestion pricing programs nationally.
[1] U.S. Env’t Prot. Agency, EPA 430-R-24-004, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990-2022 (2024).
[2] Central Business District Tolling Program, Metropolitan Transportation Authority https://www.mta.info/project/CBDTP.
[3] Congestion relief is unlocking a better New York, Metropolitan Transportation Authority, https://congestionreliefzone.mta.info/; Congestion Relief Zone Toll Information, Metropolitan Transportation Authority, https://congestionreliefzone.mta.info/tolling.
[4] Regina Clewlow, Congestion Pricing; Transforming NYC and Urban Mobility Nationwide, Forbes (Jan. 15, 2025), https://www.forbes.com/sites/reginaclewlow/2025/01/15/congestion-pricing-transforming-nyc-and-urban-mobility-nationwide/.
[5] Id.
[6] Tracey Tully, Why Trump’s Push to Kill Congestion Pricing Might Fail, N.Y. Times (Feb. 19, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/19/nyregion/trump-congestion-pricing.html.
[7] Sam Schwartz et. al., A Comprehensive Transportation Policy for the 21st Century: A Case Study of Congestion Pricing in New York City, 17 N.Y.U. Env’t. L.J. 580, 594 (2008).
[8] Id.at 593-94.
[9] Renee Anderson, Trump moves to end NYC congestion pricing. Here’s a timeline of the controversial toll., CBS News (Feb. 19, 2025), https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/nyc-congestion-pricing-timeline/.
[10] N.Y. Veh. & Traf. Law §§ 1702, 1704 (McKinney 2019).
[11] Id.
[12] Id. at 1704-a.
[13] Id. At 1701.
[14] Id.
[15] Chan v. United States Dep’t of Transportation, No. 23-CV-10365 (LJL), 2024 WL 5199945, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 23, 2024).
[16] Christine Billy, Congestion Pricing: A Case Study on Interstate Air Pollution Disputes, 2024 N.Y. St. Bar J. 45, 46.
[17] Id. at 46-47.
[18] Id. at 47.
[19] Id.
[20] Id.
[21] Chan, 2024 WL 5199945, at *6.
[22] Id.
[23] Id.
[24] Id. at 1-3.
[25] Id. at 48.
[26] Id.
[27] Solcryé Burga, What Trump Has Said About NYC Congestion Pricing, Time (Feb. 19, 2025), https://time.com/7259564/trump-congestion-pricing-nyc-funding/.
[28] Nick Reisman, Trump holds Manhattan toll plan’s fate in his hands, Politico (Feb. 10, 2025), https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/10/trump-new-york-congestional-pricing-00203344.
[29] Tracey Tully, Why Trump’s Push to Kill Congestion Pricing Might Fail, N.Y. Times (Feb. 19, 2025), https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/19/nyregion/trump-congestion-pricing.html.
[30] Id.
[31] Aaron Katersky & Meredith Deliso, DOT says it has terminated approval for NYC’s congestion pricing plan, ABC News (Feb. 19, 2025), https://abcnews.go.com/US/dot-terminated-approval-nycs-congestion-pricing-plan/story?id=118967538.
[32] Id.
[33] Id.
[34] Id.
[35] Id.