Supreme Court Case Could Spell The End For California’s EV Mandate – Watts Up With That?

From THE DAILY CALLER

Audrey Streb
Contributor

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday in a landmark case that could spell the end of California’s Clean Air Act waiver, which created what has been widely referred to as a de facto electric vehicle (EV) mandate in more than a dozen states.

While Diamond Alternative Energy v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not directly center on the legality of the waiver, the court’s ruling on whether the petitioners have standing in the case could set a “massive” precedent, creating an opportunity for President Donald Trump’s administration to “balance” the emissions standards set by “extreme climate policy,” energy experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation. The elimination of California’s Clean Air Act waiver could lead to greater freedom for consumers and cheaper vehicle prices in the state, the District of Columbia and in the 17 other states that follow aspects of California’s emissions standards, the policy experts said.

“The entire future of the auto industry, and what kinds of automobiles people are allowed to buy, what choices they have … All of that is at stake in this ruling, in this court case,” Myron Ebell, former senior fellow and director for the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute told the DCNF. “Now we finally are at the point where we can win this debate.”

States are generally held to the EPA’s standard of emissions, though they can choose to follow the more strict California standard instead under the 1970 Clean Air Act. According to the law, only California is allowed to request a waiver from federal vehicle emission standards, permission which was granted to address “extraordinary conditions” in the state, such as poor air quality.

“The Los Angeles Basin has intractable air pollution problems, and it’s not just caused by people,” he said. The Golden State has received several waivers to enforce different emissions standards for vehicles over the years, he noted, as the Los Angeles Basin traps emissions due to its topography. (RELATED: Blue State Democrats Take Another Crack At Putting Gov’t In Driver Seat Of Americans’ Cars)

The case now before the Supreme Court examines whether petitioners, like Diamond Alternative Energy which is a subsidiary of Valero Energy Corporation, have the legal standing to challenge the EPA’s 2022 decision to reinstate California’s waiver for stricter vehicle emissions standards under the Clean Air Act. Under former President Joe Biden, the EPA reinstated the 2013 waiver which the first Trump administration partially withdrew in 2019. The EPA on Feb. 14 announced that it would be “transmitting to Congress the Biden administration’s rules granting waivers that allowed California to preempt federal car and truck standards,” and Republican lawmakers have since sought ways to repeal the state’s ability to create the de facto EV mandate.

A court decision in favor of Diamond Alternative Energy could upend California’s ability to foist its emissions standards on the nation, and would allow other companies that represent key oil and gas producers to challenge the EPA’s other regulatory actions. The petitioners further argue that the California standard pins an unfair burden on fuel producers, which would lose business as a result of regulators’ push for EVs, and that they should have the standing to challenge it in court. A lower court previously ruled that the petitioners lack the standing to challenge the EPA’s waiver grant.

The lawsuit notes that the EPA has granted at least 75 waivers to California under the Clean Air Act since its inception.

“If California gets away with having the waiver, they are in control of our entire automobile transport policy,” Ebell told the DCNF.

California’s Advanced Clean Cars I program, which had its waiver reinstated in 2022, combines several regulations into one package, including zero-emission vehicle regulation and low emission vehicle criteria. The state’s Advanced Clean Cars II program, implemented in 2022  on a separate waiver, builds on this, mandating that all new cars, trucks and SUVs sold in the state — and any other state that adopts the California standard — be zero-emission by 2035.

To date, 17 states and the District of Columbia have adopted all or part of California’s emissions standards as allowed under a section in the Clean Air Act, according to the California Air Resources Board.

Under the emission standards, manufacturers are required to produce a greater amount of EVs and hybrids, or they must purchase “credits” from another auto manufacturer.

“Manufacturers are required to produce a number of [zero-emissions vehicles] ZEVs and plug-in hybrids each year, based on the total number of cars sold in California by the manufacturer,” California Air Resources Board explains. “Manufacturers with higher overall sales of all vehicles are required to make more ZEVs. Requirements are in terms of percent credits, ranging from 4.5% in 2018 to 22% by 2025.”

“The founding fathers would be rolling over in their grave if they ever thought the government would be in the business of dictating the type of transportation that Americans can choose,” Tom Pyle, president of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) told the DCNF. “The public is behind President Trump and the effort to preserve our ability to choose the types of cars that best suit our needs as consumers,” Pyle said.

Trump has been an outspoken critic of the previous administration’s push to produce more EVs as nationwide interest in the vehicles waned.

“I don’t believe that it was fair for the lower courts to argue that the plaintiffs didn’t have standing because their product is going to be severely impacted by the EV mandate because you don’t put gasoline in an EV, right?” Pyle continued.

He added that if the court does not rule in favor of Diamond Alternative Energy, the waiver can eventually “still be undone through regulatory review, but both the courts and the Trump administration’s review process will take a bit longer.” Pyle noted that the “shortest path” would be through the Congressional Review Act. (RELATED: Senate Republicans Move To Nuke California EV Mandate Despite Procedural Hurdle)

“There is a ton at stake,” Amy Gunasekara, author and former EPA Chief of Staff under the first Trump administration, told the DCNF. “This would be the first time that an administration that has been very scrutinous of this waiver authority in the past that would also be calling the shots from the Department of Justice legal strategy perspective.”

This ruling will determine who has the authority to file lawsuits against the Clean Air Act waiver, which is “one of the biggest barriers” when it comes to this issue, Gunasekara said. “It would be huge if the Supreme Court finds that these parties do, in fact, have standing to challenge the California waiver,” she continued.

“The merits have never actually been challenged in the courts, and that’s because the parties bringing the suit haven’t gotten a standing test,” Gunasekara said.

Vehicles in states that have adopted the more strict emissions standards are “ultimately subsidizing California’s decision” Gunasekara added.

Ebell also noted that the higher emission standards lead to limited choice for consumers when it comes to selecting a new vehicle, calling it a “naive belief” that the government can “order automobile manufacturers to design more efficient engines and cars that get better mileage without increasing the price or lowering the performance of the engine.”

Manufacturers have the “cloud of California hanging over them,” Gunasekara also said, adding that most regulatory attorneys would recommend auto companies take the “most risk averse approach,” which is to comply with the California standard. This means that car manufacturers must build pricier cars — like electric vehicles or hybrids — or buy special zero emissions credits to make up for not meeting the strict California emissions rules. “The ultimate loser here is the consumer,” she said.

Valero Energy Corporation, the EPA and the City of Los Angeles did not respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Related