Connect with us

California

California drops suit against Trump’s high-speed rail funding revocation

Published

on

California drops suit against Trump’s high-speed rail funding revocation


  • California High-Speed Rail Authority cites lack of federal trustworthiness
  • State plans to proceed without federal funding, seeks private investors by 2026
  • Project costs rise to $89-$128 billion, completion expected by 2033
WASHINGTON, Dec 26 (Reuters) – California has dropped a lawsuit challenging the decision by the administration of President Donald Trump to cancel more than $4 billion in federal grants for the state’s high-speed rail project, the state said late on Friday.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority, which filed the suit in July, said the decision to abandon it on Tuesday reflected the state’s “assessment that the federal government is not a reliable, constructive, or trustworthy partner in advancing high-speed rail in California.”

Sign up here.

The agency said it plans to move forward without federal funding, adding that only 18% of program expenditures for the long-delayed project have come from federal funds. A judge this month rejected a bid to dismiss the lawsuit.

The U.S. Transportation Department and White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

LATEST HEADACHE FOR PROJECT PLAGUED BY DELAY, COST OVERRUNS

Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said in July that termination of the grants by the administration of Republican President Donald Trump amounted to “petty, political retribution, motivated by President Trump’s personal animus toward California and the high-speed rail project, not the facts on the ground.”

Advertisement

The funding cuts are the latest hurdle in the 16-year effort to link Los Angeles and San Francisco by a three-hour train ride, a project that would deliver the fastest passenger rail service in the United States.

Originally planned for completion by 2020 at a cost of $33 billion, the project is now forecast to cost between $89 billion and $128 billion, with service now expected to start by 2033.

The rail system, whose first bond issue was approved by California voters in 2008, has built more than 50 major railway structures, including bridges, overpasses, undercrossings and viaducts, and completed nearly 80 miles (130 km) of guideway for the project.

The Transportation Department in August canceled another $175 million for four projects that are part of the high-speed rail program, following the cancellation of $4 billion in federal grants.

The California agency said this week it was beginning a process to attract private investors and developers by summer 2026. The agency said on Friday the loss of federal funding will not derail the project and construction, adding it was making progress.

“Rather than continuing to spend time and money challenging the termination, the state is moving forward without them,” the agency said, noting legislation signed in September secures $1 billion for the program annually through 2045.

Advertisement

The Federal Railroad Administration issued a 315-page report in June finding the project was plagued by missed deadlines, budget shortfalls and questionable ridership projections.

During his first term, Trump revoked $929 million in federal grants, a move challenged by the state, leading to a settlement in 2021 under Democratic President Joe Biden restoring the full amount.

Reporting by David Shepardson in Washington

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab



Source link

Advertisement

California

California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too

Published

on

California’s exodus isn’t just billionaires — it’s regular people renting U-Hauls, too


It isn’t just billionaires leaving California.

Anecdotal data suggest there is also an exodus of regular people who load their belongings into rental trucks and lug them to another state.

U-Haul’s survey of the more than 2.5 million one-way trips using its vehicles in the U.S. last year showed that the gap between the number of people leaving and the number arriving was higher in California than in any other state.

While the Golden State also attracts a large number of newcomers, it has had the biggest net outflow for six years in a row.

Advertisement

Generally, the defectors don’t go far. The top five destinations for the diaspora using U-Haul’s trucks, trailers and boxes last year were Arizona, Nevada, Oregon, Washington and Texas.

California experienced a net outflow of U-Haul users with an in-migration of 49.4%, and those leaving of 50.6%. Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey and Illinois also rank among the bottom five on the index.

U-Haul didn’t speculate on the reasons California continues to top the ranking.

“We continue to find that life circumstances — marriage, children, a death in the family, college, jobs and other events — dictate the need for most moves,” John Taylor, U-Haul International president, said in a press statement.

While California’s exodus was greater than any other state, the silver lining was that the state lost fewer residents to out-of-state migration in 2025 than in 2024.

Advertisement

U-Haul said that broadly the hotly debated issue of blue-to-red state migration, which became more pronounced after the pandemic of 2020, continues to be a discernible trend.

Though U-Haul did not specify the reasons for the exodus, California demographers tracking the trend point to the cost of living and housing affordability as the top reasons for leaving.

“Over the last dozen years or so, on a net basis, the flow out of the state because of housing [affordability] far exceeds other reasons people cite [including] jobs or family,” said Hans Johnson, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California.

“This net out migration from California is a more than two-decade-long trend. And again, we’re a big state, so the net out numbers are big,” he said.

U-Haul data showed that there was a pretty even split between arrivals and departures. While the company declined to share absolute numbers, it said that 50.6% of its one-way customers in California were leaving, while 49.4% were arriving.

Advertisement

U-Haul’s network of 24,000 rental locations across the U.S. provides a near-real-time view of domestic migration dynamics, while official data on population movements often lags.

California’s population grew by a marginal 0.05% in the year ending July 2025, reaching 39.5 million people, according to the California Department of Finance.

After two consecutive years of population decline following the 2020 pandemic, California recorded its third year of population growth in 2025. While international migration has rebounded, the number of California residents moving out increased to 216,000, consistent with levels in 2018 and 2019.

Eric McGhee, senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California, who researches the challenges facing California, said there’s growing evidence of political leanings shaping the state’s migration patterns, with those moving out of state more likely to be Republican and those moving in likely to be Democratic.

“Partisanship probably is not the most significant of these considerations, but it may be just the last straw that broke the camel’s back, on top of the other things that are more traditional drivers of migration … cost of living and family and friends and jobs,” McGhee said.

Advertisement

Living in California costs 12.6% more than the national average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. One of the biggest pain points in the state is housing, which is 57.8% more expensive than what the average American pays.

The U-Haul study across all 50 states found that 7 of the top 10 growth states where people moved to have Republican governors. Nine of the states with the biggest net outflows had Democrat governors.

Texas, Florida and North Carolina were the top three growth states for U-Haul customers, with Dallas, Houston and Austin bagging the top spots for growth in metro regions.

A notable exception in California was San Diego and San Francisco, which were the only California cities in the top 25 metros with a net inflow of one-way U-Haul customers.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

California

California loses $160M for delaying revocation of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants

Published

on

California loses 0M for delaying revocation of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants


California will lose $160 million for delaying the revocations of 17,000 commercial driver’s licenses for immigrants, federal transportation officials announced Wednesday.

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy already withheld $40 million in federal funding because he said California isn’t enforcing English proficiency requirements for truckers.

The state notified these drivers in the fall that they would lose their licenses after a federal audit found problems that included licenses for truckers and bus drivers that remained valid long after an immigrant’s visa expired. Some licenses were also given to citizens of Mexico and Canada who don’t qualify. More than one-quarter of the small sample of California licenses that investigators reviewed were unlawful.

But then last week California said it would delay those revocations until March after immigrant groups sued the state because of concerns that some groups were being unfairly targeted. Duffy said the state was supposed to revoke those licenses by Monday.

Advertisement

Duffy is pressuring California and other states to make sure immigrants who are in the country illegally aren’t granted the licenses.

“Our demands were simple: follow the rules, revoke the unlawfully-issued licenses to dangerous foreign drivers, and fix the system so this never happens again,” Duffy said in a written statement. “(Gov.) Gavin Newsom has failed to do so — putting the needs of illegal immigrants over the safety of the American people.”

Stay up to date with the news and the best of AP by following our WhatsApp channel.

Follow on

Advertisement

Newsom’s office did not immediately respond after the action was announced Wednesday afternoon.

After Duffy objected to the delay in revocations, Newsom posted on X that the state believed federal officials were open to a delay after a meeting on Dec. 18. But in the official letter the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration sent Wednesday, federal officials said they never agreed to the delay and still expected the 17,000 licenses to be revoked by this week.

Enforcement ramped up after fatal crashes

The federal government began cracking down during the summer. The issue became prominent after a truck driver who was not authorized to be in the U.S. made an illegal U-turn and caused a crash in Florida that killed three people in August.

Duffy previously threatened to withhold millions of dollars in federal funding from California, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, New York, Texas, South Dakota, Colorado, and Washington after audits found significant problems under the existing rules, including commercial licenses being valid long after an immigrant truck driver’s work permit expired. He had dropped the threat to withhold nearly $160 million from California after the state said it would revoke the licenses.

Advertisement

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Administrator Derek Barrs said California failed to live up to the promise it made in November to revoke all the flawed licenses by Jan. 5. The agency said the state also unilaterally decide to delay until March the cancellations of roughly 4,700 additional unlawful licenses that were discovered after the initial ones were found.

“We will not accept a corrective plan that knowingly leaves thousands of drivers holding noncompliant licenses behind the wheel of 80,000-pound trucks in open defiance of federal safety regulations,” Barrs said.

Industry praises the enforcement

Trucking trade groups have praised the effort to get unqualified drivers who shouldn’t have licenses or can’t speak English off the road. They also applauded the Transportation Department’s moves to go after questionable commercial driver’s license schools.

“For too long, loopholes in this program have allowed unqualified drivers onto our highways, putting professional truckers and the motoring public at risk,” said Todd Spencer, president of the Owner Operator Independent Drivers Association.

The spotlight has been on Sikh truckers because the driver in the Florida crash and the driver in another fatal crash in California in October are both Sikhs. So the Sikh Coalition, a national group defending the civil rights of Sikhs, and the San Francisco-based Asian Law Caucus filed a class-action lawsuit on behalf of the California drivers. They said immigrant truck drivers were being unfairly targeted.

Advertisement

Immigrants account for about 20% of all truck drivers, but these non-domiciled licenses immigrants can receive only represent about 5% of all commercial driver’s licenses or about 200,000 drivers. The Transportation Department also proposed new restrictions that would severely limit which noncitizens could get a license, but a court put the new rules on hold.





Source link

Continue Reading

California

California officials facing backlash in aftermath of Palisades fire one year later | Fox News Video

Published

on

California officials facing backlash in aftermath of Palisades fire one year later | Fox News Video


Pacific Palisades resident Rachel Darvish joined ‘Fox & Friends First’ to discuss how the deadly fire has continued to impact the community one year later and why California officials are still facing backlash for their handling of the disaster.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending