Skip to main content

California's high-speed-rail project goes ahead

The California Supreme Court decided last week not to consider an appeal of a case brought by opponents of the state’s $68 billion bullet train project, paving the way for the project to go ahead. Opponents had questioned whether the California High-Speed Rail Authority was complying with the terms of the ballot measure that funded the project. The appellate court agreed there are legitimate legal concerns about whether the “high-speed rail project the California High-Speed Rail Authority seeks to bui
October 20, 2014 Read time: 2 mins
The California Supreme Court decided last week not to consider an appeal of a case brought by opponents of the state’s $68 billion bullet train project, paving the way for the project to go ahead.

Opponents had questioned whether the California High-Speed Rail Authority was complying with the terms of the ballot measure that funded the project.

The appellate court agreed there are legitimate legal concerns about whether the “high-speed rail project the California High-Speed Rail Authority seeks to build is the project approved by the voters” but said the arguments were brought too soon.

Dan Richard, chairman of the board that oversees the high-speed rail project, said in a written statement that the state will move aggressively to build the system.

Demolition work and construction testing has already begun around Fresno, one of the hubs on the first 28-mile stretch in the Central Valley.

The decision concerns only one portion of the plaintiffs’ lawsuit. In a second phase still before the Sacramento County judge, attorneys will argue that compromises made to cut the price mean the bullet train won’t be able to travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in two hours and 40 minutes as promised in the ballot measure.

Related Content

  • January 22, 2014
    Appeals against HS2 unanimously dismissed
    The UK Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed the appeals against the HS2 high speed rail line. Following a Court of Appeal ruling in which the government won on all seven areas of challenge, the Court of Appeal gave permission to appeal to the Supreme Court on two grounds: the claim that the government was required to comply with the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive, and failed to do so (this ground was led by HS2 Action Alliance, and supported by the Local Authorities and Heathrow Hu
  • March 11, 2013
    ‘Wrong font’ on signs could overturn speeding fines
    Thousands of UK motorists caught speeding on two stretches of the M62 in Warwickshire could have their convictions overturned because the wrong font was used on the speed limit signs. The Crown Prosecution Service said the signs showed miles per hour (mph) numbers taller and narrower than they should have been, failing to comply with traffic regulations. The regulations governing variable speed limit signs are set out in a government document called Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002. If
  • December 11, 2024
    IBTTA hails Rhode Island truck toll ruling
    US federal appeals court allows tolls to continue after legal challenge
  • November 11, 2016
    ARTBA: voters want transportation investment
    The preliminary US election results showed that voters in 22 states approved ballot measures that will provide US$201 billion in funding extensions and new revenue for state and local transportation projects, according to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association’s Transportation (ARTBA).