Q&A
Debate on the broader implications of Mastro's legal work against city policies
3:02:48
·
5 min
Council Member Restler and Randy Mastro engage in a debate about the potential broader implications of Mastro's various lawsuits against city policies, including Local Law 97 and congestion pricing. Restler expresses concern about the far-reaching consequences these lawsuits could have, while Mastro defends his work and its intentions.
- Restler questions whether Mastro's lawsuit against Local Law 97 could completely undo the law
- Mastro acknowledges that the lawsuit could find Local Law 97 to be preempted by state law
- They discuss the potential impact of Mastro's congestion pricing lawsuit
- Restler argues that while Mastro's cases may focus on technicalities, their implications could be significant for city policies
- Mastro defends his work, stating that he's holding the government accountable and could help improve legislation
Lincoln Restler
3:02:48
Is it accurate?
3:02:49
I'll make these a couple yes or nos.
3:02:50
Is it accurate that a potential implication of your lawsuit against local law 97 is that the law could be completely undone?
Randy Mastro
3:02:57
It could be found to be as sweeping as it is preempted by state law.
3:03:02
It could.
Lincoln Restler
3:03:04
Yes or no, is it accurate that a potential implication of your congestion pricing lawsuit prior to Kathy Hochols, something or other, is that you could have halted the implementation of congestion pricing altogether?
3:03:16
No.
3:03:16
Your congestion pricing litigation could not have led to a whole thing of that policy.
Randy Mastro
3:03:20
No.
3:03:21
Would you like to know what?
3:03:22
Please.
3:03:23
K.
3:03:23
Thank you.
3:03:25
The lawsuit that we brought on behalf of the governor of New Jersey and New Jersey simply seeks a proper environmental full environmental review of one of a kind unprecedented, you know, congestive pricing scheme in this country and that environmental justice communities be fully considered and mitigation measures provided for them before congestion pricing goes into effect.
3:03:55
It will not prevent congestion pricing from going into effect.
3:03:59
That's not my lawsuit.
3:04:00
It's a lawsuit that some others in New York have brought.
3:04:03
The lawsuit that I brought on behalf of the governor of New Jersey and the state of New Jersey is about protecting our environmental laws, making sure the federal authorities and the MTA abide by their legal obligations under something called Neha National Environmental Protection Act to provide for full environmental reviews and for commitment of mitigation to environmental justice communities like Newark And East Orange and Bayonne and Bergen County that will obviously be adversely affected by the diversion of traffic through those New Jersey communities, yet the plan approved by the FHA, federal agency, and the MTA provided no mitigation money whatsoever in the original proposal.
3:04:47
It is about what it did.
3:04:48
Like environmental justice communities and full environmental review, which I would think environmentalists would applaud.
Lincoln Restler
3:04:54
It did ultimately include investments in E.
3:04:58
J.
3:04:58
Communities as part of the final solution that had been agreed to by the MTA.
3:05:01
But I just I think the overarching point here is that you know, some of the cases that you've discussed today, including in in our back and forth, regarding rent regulations, local law 97, are about technicalities, even minor issues.
3:05:17
And that may be true.
3:05:18
But the implications are not minor.
3:05:21
The implications are the end of rent regulations as we know it or the end of the most ambitious municipal climate legislation in the country.
3:05:28
You've argued that we shouldn't judge you based on your paying clients because everyone deserves an attorney who will represent them zealously.
3:05:36
I agree with that.
3:05:38
But we're not talking about representing clients in criminal court, and you don't have to represent every client in civil proceeding, especially as an attorney of your stature.
3:05:46
You've chosen to take on these cases.
3:05:48
Cases that could have such detrimental impact on life as we know it in New York City.
3:05:54
So, I I guess, why should I mean, just ask the question.
3:05:58
Why should we approve the nomination of a litigator who is acting we worked to strike down tenant and environmental protections and other noble public policies here in New York City when we have qualified attorneys who have not been involved in paid legal work opposed to the public interest, like you.
Randy Mastro
3:06:18
I have explained to you in 2 of those three cases, the very narrow scope of the relief that it goes to simply certain amendments applied retroactively, and that it goes to protecting environmental justice communities for which there was no mitigation originally in inadequate mitigation now.
3:06:37
These are actually principles that everyone should care about.
3:06:43
And on the third case, It involves a preemption question because of the way local law 97 was was drafted and crafted.
3:06:52
And I have explained that I'm proud of the work I've done to hold government accountable at all local, state, and federal to do the right thing.
3:07:03
And ultimately, these principles protecting the environment for having full environmental review and protection of environmental justice communities, not allowing laws to be lied retroactively when people have depended upon those laws and can ill afford otherwise.
3:07:18
And in a circumstance like local law 97, where I said flat out on behalf of our clients, We support climate change legislation.
3:07:28
We support improving the standards, but you have someone offering themselves as Corporation Castle who understands When the government doesn't get it right, when legislation needs to be improved, and who will help you craft legislation so that a preemption argument can't be made, help you a achieve those objectives, help you develop the administrative record in the legislative body to make sure that your legislation is unassailable when it gets to the courts.
3:08:00
That's actually something that I'm uniquely well qualified to help this council do because of those experiences.
3:08:07
These are not things that are anti government.
3:08:09
These are things that are pro government and holding government accountable to get it right and now helping government to ensure that when it has laudable goals, that its goals will become law that is unassailable.
3:08:23
I can help you do that, Mister Mastro.
3:08:26
I will help you do that.
Lincoln Restler
3:08:27
As as recently as July, you filed paperwork relating to local law 97 in court that as you testified today, could upend and overturn this legislation as we know it.
Randy Mastro
3:08:37
It could, but I could help you recraft that legislation so that it would be unassailable, and I wish you would let me.
3:08:44
I I To
Lincoln Restler
3:08:46
me, this isn't a laughing matter at all.