Lyft, Uber sue New York City to block driver retention law
The Lyft logo is displayed on the dashboard of a driver’s car during an airport pick-up in San Diego, California, U.S., May, 12, 2026. REUTERS/Mike Blake
Read a summary of this article on FAST.
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
NEW YORK, June 11 : Lyft joined Uber Technologies in suing New York City to block a new law they said would force them to keep bad drivers who threaten public and passenger safety on their platforms.
The Lyft lawsuit was filed late Wednesday in Manhattan federal court, 24 hours after Uber sued.
Both companies are challenging Local Law 52 of 2026, which generally prevents large ride-sharing companies from swiftly dismissing drivers absent a “bona fide economic reason” or “just cause.”
The companies said the law targeting “wrongful deactivations” violated their due process and free speech rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Guess Word
Crack the word, one row at a time
Buzzword
Create words using the given letters
Mini Sudoku
Tiny puzzle, mighty brain teaser
Mini Crossword
Small grid, big challenge
Word Search
Spot as many words as you can
They also said the law threatened irreparable harm by undermining their reputation and goodwill while keeping unsafe drivers, including those accused of sexual misconduct, on the road.
Lyft called the law “hazardous” and Uber called it “reckless.” The law would take effect on July 28, after the City Council in January overwhelmingly overrode former Mayor Eric Adams’ veto.
A spokesman for New York City’s law department said on Thursday it is reviewing both cases.
Uber and Lyft, both based in San Francisco, have faced criticism that they don’t do enough to stop drivers who abuse passengers or commit fraud.
As of June 1, Uber faced 3,571 lawsuits and Lyft faced 54 lawsuits in nationwide litigation in San Francisco federal court accusing drivers of sexual misconduct.
In challenging the New York City law, Lyft and Uber objected to requirements that they give drivers 14 days’ notice before letting them go, and potentially rehire drivers deactivated since 2019 solely because they did not receive such notice.
They also objected on privacy grounds to requiring passengers to detail alleged misconduct to accused drivers, and objected to a heightened burden of proof when defending against drivers who challenge their deactivations in court or arbitration.
City Council Speaker Julie Menin and Council Member Shekar Krishnan, the law’s main sponsor, said they looked forward to the law being upheld in court, and that the council will “fight to ensure all app-based drivers have basic due process protections.”
Source: Reuters
Sign up for our newsletters
Get the CNA app
Stay updated with notifications for breaking news and our best stories
Get WhatsApp alerts
Join our channel for the top reads for the day on your preferred chat app
Get bite-sized news via a new
cards interface. Give it a try.
Click here to return to FAST
Tap here to return to FAST
FAST
About The Author
