accessibility tools

Talking Headways: Why Civil Rights Enforcement in Transportation Matters

April 2, 2026—Senior Transportation Policy Advocate Laurel Paget-Seekins joined Jeff Wood on episode 573 of the nationally broadcast Talking Headways podcast to discuss what’s at stake as the Trump administration moves to gut Title VI disparate impact enforcement in federally funded transportation programs.

Laurel traces the history of civil rights law in transportation—from the landmark 1964 Civil Rights Act to the LA Bus Riders Union consent decree, the Oakland Airport Connector complaint, and ongoing highway expansion fights in Texas—and explains why disparate impact analysis is a critical tool for ensuring that transportation projects don’t disproportionately harm Black and brown communities.

She also breaks down a local example hitting close to home: how Clipper card fare capping policies are leaving East Oakland cash riders—disproportionately Black and Latino—paying up to $17 more per week than other riders for the same service. And she makes the case for California to build its own civil rights enforcement infrastructure before the federal protections disappear entirely.

Listen to the episode.

Related Posts

Press Release: U.S. Department of Transportation Stops Asking Who Gets Left Behind

The Trump administration has eliminated disparate impact protections under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act—stripping the federal requirement that transit agencies consider whether their decisions disproportionately harm communities of color and low-income riders. Public Advocates Senior Transportation Policy Advocate Laurel Paget-Seekins calls it "a major rollback of civil rights protections" and is calling on California to fill the gap.

Read more

Ed source: Equity advocates to ask California court to suspend billions in school construction funding

"I would love for state officials to come see where our students are going to school every day," says plaintiff Amy Campbell-Blair of True North Organizing Network—one of the voices behind Rodriguez v. State of California, which heads to an Alameda County courtroom on May 27. Public Advocates is asking a judge to freeze $3 billion in state school construction funds until California fixes a system that gives wealthy districts 2.5x more per student than low-wealth ones.

Read more

Politico Pro: Newsom sticks with controversial funding deferral in mixed-bag schools budget

"It's not a crazy maneuver given the volatility of our revenue picture" — but restraints on how much can be withheld are still warranted, says PA Managing Attorney John Affeldt on Gov. Newsom's plan to defer $3.9 billion in constitutionally-protected school funding. Politico has the full story.

Read more