The case picks back up a legal fight over conditioning funds to "sanctuary" cities and states that was never fully settled during the first Trump term:
www.nytimes.com/2025/01/31/u...

Full decision here (from the same judge who has told the administration they must make SNAP payments): storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Good point, thanks for flagging.

Annie Weinstock, a BRT expert who helped us analyze some other strategies to speed buses, put it this way:

“He’s saying ‘free and fast buses.’ To us, as people whose main expertise is around making buses faster, what we’re mostly hearing is ‘fast buses.’ And we’re very excited for that.”

After talking to a lot of people about Mamdani’s idea, we came away with the impression that many New Yorkers like the spirit of it more than the literal plan. They’re taking it as a signal he’ll do *something* about the buses. NYT/Siena polling also suggests this.

There are also some real alternatives to free buses on the table in New York, like expanding the Fair Fares program that subsidizes half-cost rides for low-income riders. Scaling it up would cost a fraction of the full free-bus proposal.

Evidence in New York’s own pilot and other cities suggests free fares drive more ridership. BUT those added riders can wipe out the time savings of getting rid of the fare. To reap time benefits, you’d need to add service. Which costs yet more $$.

This picture is a free-bus Rorschach test: On one hand, it shows many bus riders stopped paying with the pandemic, so why not rip off the bandaid? On the other, the MTA thinks it can cut fare evasion, which would make the cost in lost revenue of free buses higher than Mamdani suggests.

Yes, 10 Downing Street is in a similar spirit

It's a decidedly different experience from walking up to the Capitol (or trying to approach the seat of power in many other countries).

Diagram of Trump's alternative proposal here: www.nytimes.com/interactive/...