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

  • Qualcomm violated antitrust laws, says US district judge
    May 23, 2019
    Qualcomm has been accused of supressing competition from smartphone chip rivals by threatening to cut off supplies and extract licensing fees. US District Judge Lucy Koh has ordered the company to renegotiate licensing agreements at reasonable prices. Qualcomm, a key player in the ITS industry - particularly in the nascent area of 5G technology - refutes the ruling. “We strongly disagree with the judge’s conclusions, her interpretation of the facts and her application of the law,” said Don Rosenberg
  • Uber: AB5 ‘does not automatically reclassify’ drivers
    September 18, 2019
    Business life may be about to get trickier for transportation network companies following the passing of a new law in California which aims to give gig economy workers more rights. Assembly Bill 5 (AB5), which is due to come into effect in January next year, says that “a person providing labour or services for remuneration shall be considered an employee rather than an independent contractor” - unless three points are proved. One, that “the hiring entity demonstrates that the person is free from the con
  • Cities get road priorities right
    March 22, 2022
    Cities including Paris, Milan and London have all announced serious expansions to their bicycling infrastructure over the last few years. The era of active travel is here, finds Alan Dron
  • Don’t look at the jigsaw pieces – see the whole puzzle, says CCTA
    February 19, 2024
    There are three main barriers to taking transport ideas from the pilot stage to real-life usage: incompatible technology, local control and limited funding. Tim Haile of California’s Contra Costa Transportation Authority has some thoughts on how to overcome them