There is one big question when it comes to vehicle emissions standards. It's about who held California responsible.
We may finally have an answer, courtesy of the U.S. Supreme Court.
The dramatic impact California's EV mandate will have on consumers, national security, and power reliability is a major problem that requires urgent solutions.
SCOTUS has agreed to hear a case challenging whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency can allow California to impose stricter emissions standards than those enforced by the federal government.
The lawsuit, brought by Ohio and 16 other Republican-led states, alleges that the EPA allows California to act as a “quasi-federal regulator” on global climate change.
cab cut
How did we get here anyway?
Simply put, California started regulating vehicle emissions before the federal government, or even any other state.
In 1966, in an effort to combat the growing smog problem in the state, then-Gov. President Ronald Reagan approved the nation's first tailpipe emissions standards. A year later, the California Air Resources Board was created to set and oversee air quality regulations.
When the federal government established its own more lenient emissions standards with the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, California was able to maintain stricter regulations.
Automakers balked, arguing that dealing with state-by-state emissions standards would be prohibitively expensive.
Do you want to give up the bye-bye?
The government offered a compromise, allowing states to comply with federal standards or adopt their own emissions standards identical to those in place in California. This was accomplished through an exemption system established by the EPA, which later became known as the “California Exemption.”
Since then, about 100 exemptions have been granted in California. Under the Obama administration, the EPA essentially adopted California's greenhouse gas emissions standards as federal policy and also pushed the state to make all new vehicles zero-emissions by 2035.
In 2020, the Trump administration rescinded these regulations, but President Biden reinstated them.
In addition to Ohio, states participating in the lawsuit include Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, and Oklahoma. The states include South Carolina, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia.
fuel for fire
Fuel producers are also challenging the exemption. In June, the trade group American Fuel and Petrochemicals Manufacturers joined a coalition of 15 energy, agriculture, and biofuels organizations in filing a writ of specificity petition with SCOTUS. The coalition argues that the Clean Air Act's “California exemption” does not give one state the power to restrict consumer access to internal combustion vehicles.
in statementAFPM CEO and President Chet Thompson said:
We are very pleased that the United States Supreme Court has agreed to grant certification in this very important case. The dramatic impact of California's EV mandate on consumers, national security, and power reliability comes as California and the EPA continue to expand and abuse the limits of Congress' Clean Air Act exemptions. , is a major problem that requires immediate solution. Congress did not give California special powers to regulate greenhouse gases, mandate electric vehicles, or ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars, all of which the state intentionally misread the statute. I'm trying. We look forward to our day in court.
For too long, California has led the nation's emissions policy. Let's hope SCOTUS can finally force them out of the driver's seat.
