OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) — California this week dropped a lawsuit officials filed against the Trump administration over the federal government’s withdrawal of $4 billion for the state’s long-delayed high-speed rail project.


The U.S. Transportation Department cut funds for the bullet train intended to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles last July, citing the California High-Speed Rail Authority's lack of a “viable plan” for completing a crucial segment of the project in the agricultural Central Valley. Following the announcement, the authority promptly initiated a lawsuit, with Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom condemning the decision as a political maneuver aimed at harming California.


This week, the authority pivoted and announced it would pursue alternative funding sources to complete the project, estimated to exceed $100 billion in total costs. This action reflects the state’s assessment that the federal government is not a reliable, constructive, or trustworthy partner in advancing high-speed rail in California,” a spokesperson stated.


The Transportation Department has yet to respond to inquiries about the case. Historically, both President Donald Trump and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy have denounced the project as a “train to nowhere,” claiming that it was excessively over budget and overly regulated.


As the lawsuit was dismissed, the High-Speed Rail Authority expressed optimism, suggesting that moving ahead without federal intervention offers a chance to adopt best practices from successful modern high-speed rail systems worldwide.


In a move to secure financial backing, the project has recently obtained $1 billion annually from California's cap-and-trade program, which extends to 2045. This program limits total greenhouse gas emissions from major polluters, requiring them to reduce emissions, purchase allowances, or invest in emission-reducing projects.


The railroad, which was promised to residents, has yet to materialize, raising skepticism about its potential future completion amid changing political landscapes and funding strategies.