The governorship races in New Jersey and Virginia, and the New York City mayoral race, occur in the year immediately after the Presidential election. These races are often seen as a referendum on the incumbent President's policies. I suspect Trump is thinking that a good GOP candidate who is at least an economic conservative (cultural conservatism is a hard sell in New Jersey), basically a loyal version of Chris Christie, could win the Garden State governor's office. More than just thumbing his nose at New York Governor Hochul and the corrupt Democratic regimes in the New York City Hall and Albany, this may be why he decided to interfere in the congestion pricing issue.
All valid points, the issue is the pendulum will swing back eventually and we don’t want to set up the feds to have even more power over the states. So short term political gains vs precedent set and when not if the dems have control again you really want them with even more power over the states. Flyover country has no say what NYC does and that’s how it should be. I don’t want California or New York to be able to tell Texas what we can and cannot get our legislature to pass. Because if they could your gun rights are gone. The Texas silencer law is perfect example of the commerce clause being used by fedzilla to over turn a state law that passed.
In this administration, the most important thing in these political/legal disputes is philosophical and legal consistency. The worst thing they could do is take the approach that state law should override federal authority in a congestion tolling case in New York, while filing legal challenges to state laws and regulations in a California over vehicle emissions standards and requirements for electric vehicles under the exact opposite legal reasoning.