Much of the New Jersey political sphere has vehemently opposed New York City’s congestion pricing plan since its inception, and with the Trump administration’s move to cancel it, they feel vindicated.
Several New Jersey politicians, including Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ), have praised the tearing up of the city’s toll plan, which many within the state said unfairly targeted their commuters.
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION TEARS UP NEW YORK’S CONGESTION PRICING PLAN
“I want to thank President Trump and Secretary Duffy for their efforts to halt the current congestion pricing program,” Murphy said. “While I have consistently expressed openness to a form of congestion pricing that meaningfully protects the environment and does not unfairly burden hardworking New Jersey commuters, the current program lines the MTA’s pockets at the expense of New Jerseyans.”
Murphy added that although he has had a difference of opinion with New York on congestion pricing, “we have always had a productive relationship with our neighbors across the Hudson.”
New Jersey filed a lawsuit against the federal government over the congestion pricing plan. Murphy called it a “scheme” and “a financial strain on hardworking New Jerseyans.”
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority has sued the Trump administration to keep the plan in place for the moment.
House members in the state’s delegation on both sides of the aisle praised the move. 2025 gubernatorial hopeful Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) called it a “huge win for Jersey families.”
“From Day One, when we first started this fight, we knew that the Congestion Tax was just a giant cash grab for New York and the MTA — all on the backs of hardworking Jersey families,” he said in a post on X.
“They never cared about how the tax would hurt Jersey families — they just needed the cash to pay for the MTA’s woeful mismanagement. That was just confirmed today — and now, we can all breathe a sigh of relief,” he added.
Rep. Thomas Kean Jr. (R-NJ), one of the state’s three Republican House members, concurred.
“Thank you, President Trump, for listening to New Jersey’s concerns and ending Congestion Pricing,” he said in a statement. “From the very beginning, I have opposed this deeply flawed program that unfairly targeted New Jerseyans and all those who commute into Manhattan. This was nothing more than a money grab on New Jersey taxpayers.”
“I have made it a priority in my discussions directly with President Trump as well as my House colleagues on both sides of the aisle,” Kean said. “This is a huge victory, and we will never stop standing up for New Jersey.”
Another contender for the governor’s office in 2025, from the Republican side, praised President Donald Trump’s move to end the toll program. “Once again, President Trump is delivering on his promises,” Jack Ciattarelli, who lost to Murphy in the 2021 gubernatorial election by about 3 points, said. “This time, terminating greedy Democrats’ congestion pricing which was hurting New Jersey commuters and families.”
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, a New Jersey resident, called the plan “a slap in the face to working-class Americans and small business owners.”
“Commuters using the highway system to enter New York City have already financed the construction and improvement of these highways through the payment of gas taxes and other taxes. But now the toll program leaves drivers without any free highway alternative, and instead, takes more money from working people to pay for a transit system and not highways,” Duffy said. “It’s backwards and unfair.”
The MTA’s attorneys wrote a letter Wednesday to the judge involved in New Jersey’s case against the Department of Transportation, saying they would be taking additional legal action against the federal government.
TRACKING WHAT DOGE IS DOING ACROSS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
The complaint states that Duffy’s reason for canceling the program is the “definition of arbitrary and capricious.”
“DOT did not cite any basis in the statute authorizing it to reverse the approval it had provided just three months earlier, following a four-year intensive review process, let alone explain how the fact that the Program obviously imposes a toll (as DOT admits is authorized under the VPPP) or is aimed at congestion reduction by way of reducing vehicular congestion and promoting mass
transportation—facts DOT has known all along—render the Program impermissible,” they explained.