Uber and Lyft Win Injunction Against NYC Driver Deactivation Law

A federal judge has granted Uber and Lyft a preliminary injunction, temporarily blocking a New York City law that would have required the companies to provide drivers with advance notice before removing them from their platforms. The ruling is a significant victory for the ride-hailing giants, who argued the measure was unconstitutional and compromised rider safety.

Court Blocks NYC Ordinance

In a written ruling on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Gregory Woods in Manhattan stated that the law, which was set to take effect on July 28, was likely unconstitutional. He found that it interfered with the companies' ability to manage the safety of their services while benefiting only a small number of drivers.

"Uber and Lyft are likely to succeed in showing that the law protects a narrow class of drivers and does not advance the broader social or economic interest which the (U.S.) Constitution requires," Judge Woods wrote. The preliminary injunction halts enforcement of the law pending the final outcome of lawsuits filed by the two companies.

Companies Cite Safety Concerns

Ad

The ordinance, one of the first of its kind in the U.S., would have mandated 14 days' notice before deactivating a driver, with an exception for cases of "egregious misconduct." In separate lawsuits filed in June, Uber and Lyft contended the law violated their due process and free speech rights.

The companies argued that the notice period would force them to keep potentially unsafe drivers, including those accused of serious misconduct, on their platforms, thereby undermining their reputation and endangering the public. Following the ruling, an Uber spokesman, Josh Gold, said the decision "underscores that driver fairness and rider safety can and must go hand in hand.” A Lyft spokesperson expressed that the company was pleased the court "recognized the serious safety concerns at the heart of this challenge."

Background on the Legislation

The law was passed by the New York City Council in January after it overrode a veto from former Mayor Eric Adams. At the time, Adams had raised concerns that the law would create an expensive and inefficient bureaucracy to manage wrongful deactivation claims. This legal battle highlights the ongoing tension between gig economy companies and municipalities seeking to implement greater labor protections for independent contractors.