30° and Clear
Image
New Jersey updates lawsuit against NYC congestion pricing, challenging FHWA's approval of last-minute changes and lack of proper environmental reviews for the tolling plan
As New York City moves forward with its ambitious congestion pricing plan, designed to charge vehicles entering the city’s central business district, New Jersey has intensified its opposition. Governor Phil Murphy, backed by a recently amended lawsuit and increasing public discontent, has voiced deep concerns over the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the policy on New Jersey residents. This contentious initiative has now escalated into a regional battle, pitting neighboring states against one another.
Understanding Congestion Pricing
Congestion pricing, a strategy aimed at reducing traffic in Manhattan's Central Business District (CBD), imposes tolls on vehicles entering the area south of 60th Street. This program, spearheaded by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), is projected to generate $15 billion for the MTA’s capital improvement plans, funding public transportation while purportedly reducing emissions and gridlock in New York City.
While the program’s advocates tout its potential to transform Manhattan’s traffic woes, its critics highlight the financial burden it places on commuters, particularly those from New Jersey. Over 400,000 New Jerseyans rely on crossings like the Holland Tunnel, Lincoln Tunnel, and George Washington Bridge to commute daily, and they are poised to shoulder significant costs with little to no benefit.
New Jersey’s Legal Challenge
In 2023, New Jersey filed a lawsuit against the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), alleging that the approval process for congestion pricing violated federal environmental laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Clean Air Act. The FHWA’s “Finding of No Significant Impact” (FONSI) has been at the heart of New Jersey’s legal battle, with the state arguing that the decision was based on insufficient environmental analysis.
The lawsuit was further amended in January 2025, adding claims about last-minute changes to the tolling scheme. New Jersey contends that the MTA’s November 2024 phased tolling plan lacked the rigorous environmental scrutiny required by NEPA. The FHWA approved these changes without conducting a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), a process essential for analyzing cumulative and direct impacts.
“The decision by the federal government and the MTA to fast-track a proposal that solely benefits New York’s transportation system at the expense of hardworking New Jerseyans must be reevaluated and rescinded,” said Governor Phil Murphy. “Not only is this scheme a financial strain on hardworking New Jerseyans, but it will also have adverse environmental consequences on many North Jersey communities, as the federal government has admitted. The FHWA cannot continue to turn a blind eye to the significant environmental impacts that congestion pricing will have on New Jersey, favoring New York at the expense of its neighbors.”
Environmental and Public Health Concerns
The environmental implications of congestion pricing are particularly troubling for North Jersey communities, which already face significant pollution levels. The FHWA itself acknowledged that Bergen County and other areas in northern New Jersey would experience increased air pollution due to traffic rerouting. These pollutants, including known carcinogens, exacerbate environmental justice issues in already vulnerable communities.
Governor Murphy has criticized the FHWA’s decision to allocate only $1.4 million in mitigation funds to New Jersey, a stark contrast to the $71.7 million designated for New York’s Bronx County. With significant daily traffic increases projected for Bergen County, the disparity in funding underscores the perceived inequities in how the program’s burdens and benefits are distributed.
Economic Impact on New Jersey
Beyond environmental concerns, congestion pricing threatens to impose a significant financial strain on New Jersey residents and businesses. The policy is expected to divert traffic to crossings outside the CBD, such as the George Washington Bridge, creating bottlenecks and increasing travel times. These shifts will raise costs for commuters and businesses alike while leaving New Jersey’s transit agencies, including NJ Transit, without any share of the MTA’s revenue windfall.
Governor Murphy has called for the plan to be "reevaluated and rescinded," demanding a reevaluation that prioritizes fairness and collaboration.
Demands for Transparency and Accountability
In addition to litigation, Governor Murphy has written to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey requesting monthly data on the plan's financial and operational impacts. These data points include toll revenue by crossing and vehicle class, which New Jersey officials believe are critical for assessing the program’s effects on the region.
"While we continue to fight New York’s disastrous congestion pricing scheme through litigation, we will be closely monitoring any adverse impacts of the program on our state," said Governor Murphy. "The statistical information we are requesting will help us advocate for our commuters and the broader region as we fight this unfair policy.”
New Jersey officials also argue that the FHWA and the MTA failed to engage with the public adequately. The lack of meaningful consultation with affected stakeholders, including New Jersey, has fueled frustration and skepticism among New Jersey representatives about the program’s legitimacy.
A Call for Regional Solutions
New Jersey’s resistance to congestion pricing highlights the need for regional collaboration in addressing urban congestion and environmental challenges. While New York City’s ambitions to reduce traffic and emissions are laudable, NJ and other Tri-State representatives says that the exclusion of neighboring states from planning and mitigation efforts risks undermining the program’s long-term success.
As this legal and political battle unfolds, New Jersey remains committed to fighting this new congestion pricing plan from any angle available to the state. Whether through litigation or negotiation, New Jersey's representatives have promised to ensure that any regional traffic solution is both equitable and environmentally responsible.
Let's hold them to that promise.
