Hoylman-Sigal Celebrates NJ Judge’s Recusal From Congestion Pricing Case

State Senator Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a supporter of congestion pricing who represents Manhattan’s West Side, rejoiced after a judge set to oversee New Jersey’s lawsuit against the toll plan recused himself from the matter on Jan. 9.

Holyman-Sigal took issue with U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti being married to a political ally of NJ Governor Phil Murphy. Murphy is the plaintiff in his state’s suit against the U.S. Department of Transportation, which he accuses of violating environmental laws when it signed off on the congestion zone. Specifically, New Jersey asserts that the congestion zone will merely redirect traffic and pollution across the Hudson, thus violating the National Environmental Policy Act.

”I’m relieved to hear that U.S. District Judge Brian Martinotti has rightly recused himself from New Jersey’s ill-conceived lawsuit to delay the Central Business District Tolling Program, as I had called on him to do,” Hoylman-Sigal said in a statement.

“With the fate of our environment, economy, and public transit system at stake, New Yorkers deserve a fair shake before a jurist without even an appearance of or potential for bias.”

The MTA has repeatedly sniped back at NJ during the tiff, namely by calling the suit “baseless” and asking New Jersey to present evidence for its claims.

On Dec 6, 2023, Holyman-Sigal wrote a letter outlining his complaint to Chief Judge Renée Marie Bumb of the U.S. District Court for New Jersey. In other words, he appealed to Martinotti’s colleague.

“Judge Martinotti should recuse himself based on the close political ties between his spouse, Cliffside Park Councilwoman Dana Martinotti, and Phil Murphy, the Governor of the State of New Jersey, the plaintiff in New Jersey v. U.S. Department of Transportation,” he wrote.

“On April 15, 2021, Governor Murphy appointed Councilwoman Martinotti as a Commissioner of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (the “Port Authority”),” he added.

Hoylman-Sigal cited a canon from the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, which he noted instructs judges to avoid the “appearance of impropriety in all activities.” He went on to quote from an advisory opinion issued by the Committee on Codes of Conduct of the Judicial Conference, which partially reads ““[w]hen a spouse’s business relationships with a party, law firm, or attorney appearing before the judge cause the judge’s impartiality reasonably to be questioned, the judge must recuse, absent remittal.’”

In addition to his “appearance of impropriety,” Hoylman-Sigal raised other issues that he believes Judge Martinotti had when it came to being involved with the congestion suit.

Firstly, he said that the Martinottis belong to a class of Bergen County political officials that Murphy’s suit claims would be allegedly harmed by congestion pricing, meaning that they may have a stake in a certain outcome of the suit as “affected parties.”

Holyman-Sigal also pointed to a Wall Street Journal report outlining past financial conflicts of interest that Judge Martinotti has had on the bench, which he called a “troubling history of recusal violations.”

The Manhattan politician closed out his letter with a vigorous endorsement of congestion pricing’s goals: “When my colleagues and I in the New York State Legislature approved legislation establishing the Central Business District Tolling program in 2019, we did so on the promise that congestion pricing would ease traffic, reduce carbon emissions, improve street safety and bolster mass transit.”

This was why, Hoyman-Sigal said, it was crucial that any suit against the program “must be overseen by a fair and impartial judge whose probity is beyond reproach.”