To confront and address decades of underinvestment in disadvantaged communities, the U.S. Department of Transportation is committed to ensuring that transportation investments increase opportunity; advance racial equity and environmental justice; serve rural, urban, and suburban communities equitably; and promote affordable access for all. This article describes how the USDOT is working to achieve these goals by reinvigorating its programmatic enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Section 504). It is also integrating equity considerations across USDOT funding programs as part of the Justice40 Initiative and administering the Reconnecting Communities Pilot (RCP) Program and Rural Surface Transportation Grants established by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). USDOT is also working to provide tools and resources to support eliminating or minimizing adverse impacts of investments, including displacement and relocation of people and businesses from underserved communities.
This article summarizes Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Legal Research Digest 58: Policing and Public Transportation. The report analyzes constitutional and other issues in cases brought against public transportation authorities under the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, for alleged civil rights violations in the policing of public transportation authorities’ premises and vehicles. Issues addressed include Section 1983 claims against public transportation authorities and police officers for allegations such as false arrest, unlawful search and seizure, excessive force, and due process denials. Other topics discussed include the impact of the Second Amendment on regulating firearms on public transportation, COVID-19 response, public transportation authorities' organizational structures and contractual agreements that apply to their policing, and best practices that public transportation authorities have adopted for the policing of their stations, vehicles, and other property.
This digest documents the laws, statutes, cases, procedures, policies, and other resources governing or addressing (1) a transportation agency’s prevention or removal of unsheltered encampments from transportation rights-of-way; (2) the authorized use of transportation rights-of-way for shelters for unhoused individuals and social services to assist transportation agencies in addressing safety, health, and public welfare issues; and (3) the ability of transportation agencies to control their rights-of-way. Also, this digest includes a comprehensive overview of the types of legal claims against transportation agencies that involve prevention or removal of encampments from transportation rights-of-way, and the use of transportation rights-of-way for authorized shelters. The digest will be useful to transportation lawyers, engineers, planners, state and federal civil rights transportation officers, private civil rights attorneys, civil rights groups, administrators, and researchers of civil rights in transportation.
On December 1, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Rosa Parks took her seat in the first row behind the white section on a segregated bus. At that time Jim Crow laws reserved the bus's first 10 seats for white passengers only. The bus became crowded and the bus driver insisted the four black passengers in Rosa's row stand and make their seats available to any white riders. This brief article looks at the Montgomery Jim Crow laws related to buses, Rosa Park's decision not to give up her seat, her subsequent arrest, and the resulting Montgomery Bus Boycott led by Martin Luther King.
All Recipients of federal funding must comply with the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other nondiscrimination statutes, regulations, and authorities. This document was developed through a Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) survey collecting commendable practices and procedures in Title VI Implementation Plans (Plans) from 51 state departments of transportation that were current in federal fiscal year 2019. FHWA selected elements from these Plans that it considered promising practices and compiled the results into a Plan outline. This document is not intended as guidance, and it does not create new requirements or represent a statement of FHWA policy or interpretation of existing requirements. It is intended as an aid to recipients of federal financial assistance from the FHWA in the development of Title VI Plans and other methods of administration.
This paper commences by considering the right of older people to travel and then examines their contributions to society and how these can be valued, which shows that older people make an economic contribution to society that exceeds the costs that they impose. The benefits of greater mobility for older people, both to themselves and to wider society, are then considered, followed by discussion of the influence of aging on mobility in terms of the types of journeys they make in terms of trip purpose and modal share. Having considered these issues, the paper examines ways of overcoming the barriers to access for older people so that they can travel more, and so enhancing their contribution to society while enjoying their right to travel.
This digest analyzes federal laws and regulations as they affect transportation agencies in their business practices, construction of facilities, hiring, and services provided to the public. Specifically, the digest discusses: 1) the constitutionality of the U.S. DOT’s disadvantaged business enterprise program applicable to public contracting and judicial precedents since Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena; 2) disparate impact cases that have arisen out of the location of highways and related projects and the effects of Section 601 of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and § 602 of Title VI; 3) the constitutional and statutory authority for § 1983 actions based on the authority of Congress to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; 4) the statutory and regulatory framework for claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA); 5) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as a proscription of disparate treatment by employers in hiring, including pattern-or-practice discrimination, promotions, suspensions, and terminations; 6) the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the prohibition of discrimination in employment, in providing public services, and in providing accommodations to individuals with disabilities, including those who use wheelchairs; and 7) the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically state Adopt-a-Highway programs and free speech in the workplace.
Americans with Disabilities (ADA) paratransit eligibility appeal programs allow appellants the opportunity to present new information not provided or available during the initial eligibility decision that may warrant a change in eligibility determination. At the same time, any appeal program must consistently apply the decision-making standards established by the agency’s ADA paratransit certification program. As more agencies employ some form of conditional eligibility, eligibility appeal processes are emerging as a significant area of vulnerability. If the eligibility appeal process is not administered properly, transit agencies run the risk of violating applicants’ civil rights under the ADA or Title VI requirements. This synthesis study identifies ADA eligibility appeal processes and documents current practices of transit systems. A literature review and detailed survey responses of 37 out of 45 transit agencies are provided (for an 82% response rate). An analysis on the state of the practice, emphasizing lessons learned, challenges, and gaps in information also is provided. Five case examples with varying approaches to eligibility appeals were also developed.
Florida and the state of New York are using peer-exchanges to tackle the problem of complying with civil-rights regulations in carrying out innovative contracts for large highway projects. Agencies need guidance in meeting the requirements of the Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) program and the requirements for equal-opportunity employment, especially when dealing with the complexities of design-build project delivery for projects over $500 million. This article examines the development of various partnerships among public and private entities and how those partnerships facilitated oversight and administration of of innovative contracts. It also provides details on the peer-exchange teams’ study of the Florida I-595 Express, the Port Miami Tunnel, and the New NY Bridge project.
Transportation policy has long been concerned with the achievement of direct outcomes (e.g., maximum mobility, reduced unit travel times, increased access) and with indirect outcomes (e.g., regional economic development). More recently, a distinct concern has arisen about equity and justice in transportation and, in a broad sense, about whether all transport system users have equal access and fair burden and benefit distributions. The equity policy framework in the United States rests on and is closely bound up with the post–Civil War struggle for civil rights. This paper (a) describes what American conceptions of civil rights have come to mean in U.S. policy and legal spheres, (b) discusses the extent to which transportation is seen as a civil right, (c) discusses what the limits of those rights are and how those definitions have changed over time, and (d) suggests some current issues for U.S. policy makers that, going forward, must be considered in a civil rights approach to transportation equity.
