Uber $UBER filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court seeking to block a New York City law that would restrict its ability to remove drivers from its platform, arguing the measure threatens passenger safety and violates its constitutional rights.
Local Law 52 would require Uber to show just cause before removing drivers, and let thousands deactivated since 2019 seek reinstatement
Uber / Getty Images
Uber $UBER filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court seeking to block a New York City law that would restrict its ability to remove drivers from its platform, arguing the measure threatens passenger safety and violates its constitutional rights.
The complaint, which Uber filed Tuesday in Manhattan federal court, takes aim at Local Law 52 of 2026, a measure set to go into force on July 28. Under the ordinance, according to Reuters, ride-share companies above a certain size could not remove drivers from their platforms unless they had a qualifying economic rationale or demonstrated just cause. The law carves out exceptions allowing removal for offenses including account sharing, fraud, violence, sexual harassment or assault, and discrimination.
Keeping drivers on its platform despite determinations that they had breached its rules would, Uber argued, cause "immediate and irreparable harm" to its reputation and goodwill. The company is seeking both preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, plus costs.
Separately, companies covered by the law must give drivers advance notice of at least 14 days before any deactivation. In Uber's view, that notice period creates a dangerous gap during which drivers could target the very passengers who complained about them. Another provision drew Uber's objection: a mechanism through which drivers may trigger a city inquiry, one that Uber described as rigged against it — the company called it a "kangaroo court" arrangement — because every deactivation is treated as wrongful from the outset and the burden of proof falls entirely on Uber.
Uber also argues that the law violates its First Amendment rights. The company says that being forced to share rider comments, ratings, and complaints with drivers under investigation would threaten its free-speech protections. Uber believes releasing this information could put riders' privacy at risk and make it easier for people who commit fraud to avoid detection.
According to figures cited in Uber's complaint, passage of the law would open the door to reinstatement requests from a pool of over 12,000 drivers who were removed from the platform in New York City at any point after July 2019. Revisiting that volume of past deactivations would be deeply burdensome, Uber argued, in part because many of those cases predate any expectation that records would need to be preserved for potential legal challenges years later.
Enacted in January after a 46-5 City Council vote that overrode a veto from then-Mayor Eric Adams, the law represented a significant shift in how platform-based deactivations can be handled. A joint statement from Speaker Julie Menin and Council Member Shekar Krishnan, who led the push for the legislation, pushed back against Uber's legal challenge. "This Council stands with workers and will continue to fight to ensure all app-based drivers have basic due process protections, so they are not unfairly deprived of their livelihoods without notice or an opportunity to appeal," the two Democrats said. "We look forward to these protections being upheld in court."
New York City's law department said the case is under review. As of Reuters' reporting, Lyft $LYFT — which faces the same legal obligations under the ordinance as Uber — had not indicated how it intended to respond.
Join 500,000+ readers who start their day with Quartz.
By subscribing, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.