Major Business Groups Support Federal Government in EV Mandate Dispute
On Monday, notable business organizations are planning to join forces with the federal government as California leads a coalition of states aiming to overturn the withdrawal of certain electric vehicle (EV) mandates.
The American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce (Amfree), which serves as a government alternative to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has initiated a lawsuit in Oakland federal court. They seek to intervene in California’s ongoing challenges along with three bipartisan Congressional Review Act resolutions endorsed by the president.
Several agricultural and trade organizations backing this intervention claim that the plaintiffs should not have preemptive rights regarding government mandate enforcement. They argue that regulations affecting food stalls are impeding American commerce.
Amfree suggested that the challenges against the mandates should be rejected outright to protect the situation from judicial review. They further contend that California lacks standing and that the courts do not hold constitutional power to disrupt congressional procedures related to the Congressional Review Act.
Amfree argues that Congress used its authority correctly to override the Biden-era exemption previously granted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). “President Trump and Congress should be trusted to address issues such as the California EV Mandate, which, frankly, is just a mess,” stated Gentry Collins, Amfree’s CEO. He added that just because Governor Newsom is dissatisfied with the outcome doesn’t mean he can leverage the courts to overturn what elected officials have decided.
Michael Bushbacher, the lead attorney in this case and a partner at Boyden Gray, emphasized that the law is explicit regarding challenges to laws like the ones related to EV mandates. He explained that there is no judicial review for CRA resolutions, which means that the decisions should stand without interference.
In commentary about the attempt to intervene, Bushbacher noted that bringing Amfree and its partners into the case may help avoid extensive legal battles that can fall under multiple presidential administrations. He also commented on the debate surrounding federal judicial overreach, stating that it seems the plaintiffs are trying to navigate the delicate balance of state and federal authority.
California’s Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Robert Bonta have defended their position, claiming that the actions taken by EPA officials and the Trump administration overlook established precedents in the regulatory landscape.
Governor Newsom characterized the situation as an ongoing assault on California’s environmental efforts. “This attack isn’t just destructive; it’s harmful to our air quality and undermines America’s global competitiveness,” he remarked.
Bonta reiterated these concerns, stating that the Republican administration’s actions are politically charged and detrimental. He emphasized the importance of maintaining strict vehicle standards, asserting that these are life-and-death issues for communities affected by poor air quality.
Several other blue states, including Pennsylvania, have aligned some of their EV mandates with California’s initiatives. Some industry figures, like journalist John Stossel, have spoken out about the complications posed by California’s stringent regulations. Meanwhile, Virginia has also navigated similar challenges, having worked on implementing its own EV mandates in the past.
