Bill responds to recent Second Circuit decision and would preserve discounts for Staten Islanders on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, as well as other residential toll discounts throughout the nation.
Washington, DC - Last night, Rep. Michael E. McMahon introduced The Residential and Commuter Toll Fairness Act of 2009 (H.R. 3960), legislation that protects toll and fare discounts based on residential status. The bill would protect Staten Island residential discounts on the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge, Bayonne and Goethals Bridges and the Outerbridge Crossing, as well as similar residential discount programs throughout New York and the country.
Rep. McMahon’s bill developed in response to a recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the case Selevan v. New York Thruway Authority (Selevan), which alleges that toll discounts for New York residents of towns bordering the Thruway are unconstitutional. The Second Circuit decided to reinstate the case, which will now move forward in New York’s District Court for the Northern District where it was originally brought.
“Studies consistently show that Staten Islanders have the longest and most costly commutes in the nation,” said Rep. McMahon. “The Verrazano Bridge’s toll is now $11 – the highest toll for any bridge in the US. Staten Islanders have a greater overall toll burden than any other county, so the claim that we are somehow getting an advantage over other travelers because of the resident toll discount is utterly preposterous.”
“Congress has the right to regulate commerce pursuant to the Constitution,” continued Rep. McMahon. “Many of these cases challenging resident toll discounts are brought as violations to the Dormant Commerce Clause. My bill provides express Congressional authorization for these discounts and makes clear that these toll discounts are constitutional, fair and necessary to help alleviate the heavy toll burdens paid by so many commuters in my district. But this is not just for Staten Islanders; it’s a national issue affecting every person in communities burdened by high tolls and fares who would otherwise be unable to travel without these critical discount programs.”
The Selevan decision may have a ripple effect on other cases currently pending in New York state – specifically, Janes v. Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority (Janes), a 2006 case challenging the constitutionality of giving Staten Island residents a discount on the toll for the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge. The Janes case was stayed pending the Second Circuit’s decision, which just came down on October 15, 2009.
Relying primarily on the Dormant Commerce Clause in the Selevan decision, Second Circuit Judge Jose A. Cabranes stated that the New York Thruway Authority “may not impose on users of the Bridge a burden that is not commensurate with the benefit that it confers, and it may not discriminate against interstate commerce." Judge Cabranes also decided that the Selevan case could move forward on the plaintiff’s claims under the Privileges and Immunities and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment.
The Selevan case, which specifically challenged toll discounts received by residents who cross the New York Thruway between Buffalo and Niagara Falls, was originally dismissed by the Northern District. The plaintiff appealed to the Second Circuit, which has remanded the case for further review and proceedings consistent with its decision.
A similar case challenging the constitutionality of residential discount programs is pending in the US District Court for Massachusetts as well.
