The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is pushing back against former executive William E. Baroni Jr., urging the Second Circuit not to greenlight another shot at $4 million in legal fees tied to the infamous “Bridgegate” scandal. Officials argue that a recent appellate ruling reviving Baroni’s claims threatens to upend long-standing principles of federalism.
Jurisdiction Clash Over State Immunity
In a petition filed Tuesday seeking panel and en banc rehearing, the Port Authority contended that a December appellate decision, which allowed Baroni to pursue indemnification for his overturned Bridgegate conviction, ignored decades of precedent surrounding state sovereign immunity. The agency said the panel’s ruling improperly minimized the role of immunity, effectively broadening federal court jurisdiction over state-law claims.
“Entities like the Port Authority that implement important government functions will be forced to defend on the merits in federal court cases under state law that would fail at the outset in state court,” the filing read.
The panel itself, through a “mini en banc procedure,” acknowledged that its decision diverged from Second Circuit precedent set in the 2011 case Caceres v. The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, which held that state-law immunity limits federal courts’ subject-matter jurisdiction over state-law claims.
