Full Breakdown
Boston Lawsuit Over $20 Million RAISE Grant Withdrawal
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event: Federal Grant Revoked and Lawsuit Filed
Boston will file a federal lawsuit on Monday, September 28, challenging the U.S. Department of Transportation’s 2025 decision to withdraw a $20 million grant awarded in 2022 for the Roxbury Resilient Corridor project. The city argues the withdrawal was based on the project’s modest EV-charging allocation—less than 1 % of the total cost—and was politically motivated, contrary to the purpose of the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) program.
Background & Context
The RAISE program, created by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021, funds projects that improve safety, sustainability, and equity in disadvantaged communities. Boston’s grant was intended to upgrade sidewalks, greenery, transit amenities, and traffic flow on Melnea Cass Boulevard, Malcolm X Boulevard, and Warren Street in Roxbury, a “persistent poverty” neighborhood. The grant would have covered roughly 60 % of the estimated $34 million project cost.
Timeline
- 2022 – Federal grant of $20 million awarded.
- Fall 2025 – DOT withdraws the award, citing misalignment with agency priorities.
- Later 2025 – Boston offers to eliminate the EV-charging component; DOT declines.
- September 28 2026 – Boston files the lawsuit in U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts.
Key Figures & Groups
- Michelle Wu — Mayor of Boston, leading the legal challenge.
- Ayanna Pressley — U.S. Representative, advocate for the grant.
- Sean Duffy — Secretary of Transportation, named in the suit.
- Public Rights Project — Pro bono legal organization representing the city.
- Rev. Willie Bodrick II — Senior pastor, community voice along the corridor.
- U.S. Department of Transportation — Federal agency that rescinded the funding.
Data & Statistics
- Grant amount: $20 million.
- Total project cost: just under $34 million.
- EV-charging allocation: < 1 % of budget.
- Anticipated improvements: safety upgrades, expanded sidewalks, added lighting, trees, cooling spaces, and enhanced bus service.
Official Statements & Responses
Boston’s filing asserts that the agency exceeded its statutory authority, violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and prioritized political preferences over congressional intent.
Criticism & Opposition
The Public Rights Project criticized the withdrawal, emphasizing that the EV-charging component represented only a fractional portion of the funding and that the federal government had previously encouraged such sustainability measures.
On-the-Ground Reports
Local residents expressed frustration, noting that the loss of federal funds halted street improvements and deprived the community of promised safety and environmental benefits.
Why It Matters / Impact
If successful, Boston’s lawsuit could reaffirm congressional control over grant programs and limit agency discretion to alter funding based on shifting political agendas. The case also highlights tension between federal energy policy and local efforts to promote sustainable transportation in underserved neighborhoods.
Verbatim Quotes
- “Boston earned this competitive grant to meet community needs and address long-needed infrastructure upgrades,” — Mayor Michelle Wu
- “Boston lost a $20m infrastructure grant over electric vehicle chargers that represented a fraction of 1% of the funding – infrastructure the federal government itself encouraged.” — Public Rights Project
- “There was no good reason to rescind these funds,” — Ayanna Pressley
- “Our community deserves that investment and deserves answers as to why that capital was taken from our community, and hopefully the court will give us a fair hearing and restore the $20 million reward that the government has taken away.” — Rev. Willie Bodrick
