New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is back in the hot seat for another bridge scandal.

The Manhattan District Attorney's Office and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are investigating Christie's administration and the Port Authority of New York for possible securities law violations involving the NJ's Pulaski Skyway Bridge, reports Reuters.

The new inquiry was prompted by Christie's infamous "Bridgegate" scandal, the ongoing federal investigation into the George Washington Bridge lane closures that has cast a dark shadow over the governor's prospect of being elected as the Republican contender in the race for the White House in 2016.

Investigations into the Pulaski Bridge stem from a 2011 $1.8 billion road agreement to repair the crumbling bridge that connects Newark and Jersey City.

According to documents obtained by the New York Times, the governor's staff muscled money from the Port Authority to pay for extensive repairs to the Skyway and related road projects in 2010 and 2011.

In response, Port Authority lawyers repeatedly rejected Christie's lobbying efforts to secure funds for the bridge, arguing that it is owned and operated by the state, not the Port Authority.

Yet still, the Christie administration relentlessly lobbied to use the money for the Skyway bridge, with Christie making a public declaration that the state planned to use Port Authority money even before a deal was reached.

Eventually, the Port Authority caved to pressure and justified the Skyway repairs by casting the bridge as an access road to the Lincoln Tunnel, despite the fact that the two are not connected. The Port Authority also called the projects "Lincoln Tunnel Access Infrastructure Improvements" in bond documents describing the Skyway reconstruction and other repairs.

As a result, this mischaracterization of the project has become a major focus of the probe. Under a New York's Martin Act, prosecutors can bring felony charges for intentionally deceiving bond holders, even without evidence of intent to defraud or establishing that any fraud occurred.

In addition, the investigation could also result in civil action under the Martin Act or by the SEC, under federal securities laws.