A major legal battle could decide what types of cars Americans can buy

Blue states are preparing for a battle with the Trump administration over their authority to limit tailpipe emissions, a showdown that will have a significant impact on the types of cars and trucks sold to American drivers.

All sides expect President-elect Donald Trump to seek to strip states of the authority to adopt California’s strict vehicle pollution regulations.

Many states’ efforts to combat climate change depend on a federal process that allows them to impose strict regulations on transportation, which is the nation’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions.

This long-standing exemption authority allows California — and the dozen or so states that follow its lead — to apply regulations that go beyond federal limits, covering everything from certain pollutants to the sale of certain vehicles. The states that follow California’s more stringent standards make up a significant portion of the U.S. auto market and exert great influence over the cars offered to American consumers.

“It becomes a de facto national standard,” said Ethan Elkind, director of the climate program at the Center for Law, Energy & the Environment at UC Berkeley School of Law. “The combined power of California and these other states is pretty significant.”

During his first term, Trump attempted to revoke California’s exemption, a move that many states viewed as unlawful. The attempt to deny the exemptions faced legal challenges until President Joe Biden took office. This time, Trump will have a “much more coherent plan” to block the state’s efforts to tidy up its cars and trucks, Elkind said.

California is asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to complete several outstanding waivers before Trump returns to the White House. Officials in blue states are preparing to defend their authority in court if Trump tries to revoke the exemptions. And attorneys general in some red states are pushing to eliminate the exemptions altogether — posing a legal challenge to California’s power to set its own rules.

“Without [California’s waiver authority]“We would probably be a decade or more behind where we are today in the U.S. automobile market,” said Mary Nichols, former chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, the agency that sets the state’s automobile regulations. “It is essential for achieving our climate goals.”

Nichols now serves as a distinguished advisor to the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the UCLA School of Law.

State efforts

When Congress enacted federal air quality laws in the 1960s, it gave California the authority to go beyond national standards because it was the only state that had already passed its own auto emissions regulations. The state’s geography, with its mountains trapping harmful pollution in densely populated areas, also contributed to California’s unique status. Over more than 50 years, the state has received more than 100 exemptions from the government, covering everything from particulate matter to catalytic converters to “check engine lights.”

The EPA allows other states to adopt the regulations set by California. Seventeen other states and the District of Columbia have adopted portions of California’s regulations – representing 40% of the light-duty vehicle market and more than 25% of the heavy-duty vehicle market.

“These waivers are a really important part of our emissions reduction strategy in line with the climate science that tells us what we need to do,” said Joel Creswell, program manager for climate pollution reduction at the Washington State Department of Ecology. “They are also very important to our air quality near roadside communities.”

In the final days of the Biden administration, California leaders have called on the EPA to finalize a number of pending waivers covering topics such as sales of electric cars, heavy-duty fleets, garden equipment and refrigerated vehicles. The agency approved several of those exemptions in December and January, including a landmark rule banning the sale of gasoline-powered cars until 2035.

California Democratic Attorney General Rob Bonta, who spoke to Stateline in November, said the law requires the government to grant and maintain the waivers unless the state’s actions are “arbitrary and capricious.”

“If there is an attempt by the Trump administration to revoke it, or if it is unlawfully denied, we will take very vigorous action to protect California’s ability to apply for its waivers,” he said.

Elkind, the legal expert, said Biden’s administration likely left the waivers until the last minute because officials wanted to build a sturdy case that would make it tough for Trump to revoke them.

“The EPA needs to be more careful and specific in justifying its grant,” he said, pointing out that “California is required to reduce emissions of these very specific pollutants and it will not be able to meet its Clean Goals.” . “Air Act requirements without zero-emission vehicles.”

Push back

California’s waivers faced opposition from numerous industry groups, including automakers, trucking associations, railroads, agriculture companies and fossil fuel suppliers. In many cases, they argue that the standards require a shift to cleaner technologies that are not yet widely available or cost-effective. Trucking companies, for example, say there are few semi-truck engines that meet the recent standard for nitrogen oxide emissions.

“She [federal regulators] “We adopted an aggressive standard and gave manufacturers little time to develop this product,” said Mike Tunnell, senior director of energy and environmental affairs at the trade group American Trucking Associations. “It turns out they didn’t give them enough time.”

Tunnell said truck dealers in California are struggling with product shortages. For this reason, some companies continue to employ existing trucks and keep muddy engines on the road. His group opposes another exemption requested by California that would require companies to convert their truck fleets to zero-emission models. Current trucks that meet this standard are significantly more high-priced than typical models, Tunnell said.

Truckers in New York — which has adopted California’s standard — are already struggling to buy the equipment they need, said Kendra Hems, president of the Trucking Association of New York. She noted that the state lacks charging infrastructure to support the transition to electric trucks and that current models have confined range, forcing drivers to make regular stops on their routes.

“We’re not against it, we’re just not ready,” Hems said. “You’re asking an industry to comply with something that simply doesn’t have the supporting infrastructure.”

Automakers have made a similar argument about California’s electric vehicle sales mandate, saying in a statement that it would take “a miracle” to phase out recent gasoline-powered cars by 2035.

The industry groups have pushed for a uniform national standard, a cause supported by 17 Republican-led states. A coalition of state attorneys general filed a lawsuit in 2022 challenging California’s authority to set stricter rules.

“This is not the United States of California,” Ohio Republican Attorney General Dave Yost, who has led the legal effort, said in a 2021 press release challenging California’s exemptions.

In a letter to the EPA opposing Biden’s reinstatement of a waiver, Yost argued that California’s rules create a de facto national standard for automakers, resulting in more high-priced cars for consumers in every state. This violates the right of states to equal sovereignty, he claimed.

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court said it would consider whether the fuel manufacturers who joined the case challenging the exemptions had sufficient grounds to sue. However, the court declined to consider the legality of California’s underlying waiver authority.

As the legal battle continues, Elkind maintained that opponents of California’s longstanding status do not have a sturdy case.

“The waiver has been granted to California repeatedly for more than half a century,” he said. “The Clean Air Act provides a solid legal foundation and the rationale is extremely well documented.”