Numerous trade associations are asking the Supreme Court to review a lower court’s decision that effectively allowed California to push electric vehicles (EVs) on the rest of the U.S.

The coalition of plaintiffs are asking the highest court in the land to take up a review of the D.C. Circuit’s dismissal of a previous challenge against the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) approval of a California Air Resource Board (CARB) request to pursue tailpipe emissions standards that are more stringent than federal requirements. If the Supreme Court were to take the case and decide favorably for the plaintiffs, the ruling could potentially deal a serious blow to California’s de facto ability to dictate emissions standards and force EVs on the rest of the country, a spokesperson for one of the involved trade associations suggested.

“We are asking the Supreme Court to reverse the D.C. Circuit’s erroneous holding that fuel providers lack ‘standing’ to challenge EPA’s unlawful California waiver, and also to provide long overdue clarity on the authority of EPA and California to mandate electric vehicles,” said Chet Thompson, AFPM’s president and CEO. “California is not a ‘super state,’ its Clean Air Act carveout does not give it special privileges to regulate greenhouse gas emissions standards or dictate what types of car and truck powertrains can be sold in this country. Authority of this magnitude rests with Congress.”

Diamond Alternative v Environmental Protection – Petition for Writ by Nick Pope on Scribd

California is unique in that it can apply for Clean Air Act waivers to issue vehicle emissions rules that are tighter than those of the federal government; a number of states have voluntarily attached themselves to CARB’s standards. However, as policy experts have previously explained to the Daily Caller News Foundation, this dynamic is likely to essentially force manufacturers to either produce fleets for CARB-aligned states and non-CARB states, or to simply make their entire fleets CARB-compliant despite the fact that many states do not want to adhere to CARB’s policies.

As a concurrent challenge of 17 States explains, there are serious constitutional concerns with a statute that allows only California to act as a junior-varsity EPA,” the filing states. “Simply put, the waiver and authority claimed here are key parts of a coordinated agency strategy to convert theNation from liquid-fuel-powered vehicles to electric vehicles.”

Organizations involved in the litigation include the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), the Domestic Energy Producers’ Alliance (DEPA), the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS) and the Energy Marketers of America (EMA). The D.C. Circuit previously dismissed an appeal seeking to block the CARB waiver on the grounds that the plaintiffs lacked standing.

The request to the Supreme Court specifically addresses the Clean Air Act waiver for CARB’s “Advanced Clean Cars I” rules, which required manufacturers to increase EV and zero-emissions vehicle sales over time. If the Supreme Court takes the review and rules against the regulators, the decision could also have implications for CARB’s “Advanced Clean Cars II” rule, which bans the sale of new gas-powered passenger vehicles in the state starting in 2035, the spokesperson for one of the organizations involved in the litigation suggested.

Neither CARB nor the EPA responded immediately to requests for comment.

(Visited 369 times, 1 visits today)