California-led Coalition Files Suit to Prevent Rollback of Vehicle Emission Standards

A coalition of states has opened a new front in the ongoing battles between the Trump Administration’s efforts to streamline regulations applicable to industry and the interests favoring additional regulation. In response to the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (“U.S. EPA’s”) recent announcement that the agency will ease greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emission standards applicable to light-duty vehicles, a group of states have gone to court to oppose that change.

Led by California, the group filed suit against U.S. EPA in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Tuesday, May 1^st, seeking review of U.S. EPA’s notice to reconsider the GHG emission standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2022-2025. California leads the challenge because the Clean Air Act specifically authorizes California to enforce stricter air pollution laws than the federal standards, and the California standards were specifically targeted by U.S. EPA in a press release accompanying the rollback announcement. Thirteen states and the District of Columbia have adopted California’s stricter light-duty GHG emissions standards—functionally forcing automakers to comply with those standards nationally.

California alleges that U.S. EPA’s proposed action violates the Clean Air Act, does not follow the agency’s own regulations, and is arbitrary and capricious. Joining California in the suit are Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

Whether California’s standards stay in place, or U.S. EPA is successful in rolling them back, will have significant implications for automakers and automotive suppliers. Given the efficiency limitations inherent to internal combustion engines, to achieve lower emission standards automakers will need to do one of two things, (1) build fewer SUVs and more small cars, or (2) replace some portion of their conventional production with all-electric vehicles. Both options would likely significantly impact current and future production decisions throughout the automotive sector.

We will continue to provide updates on the rulemaking and any related litigation as matters develop. If you have any questions on this alert or on a related matter, contact Ed Burbach at eburbach@foley.com, Gary Rovner at grovner@foley.com, Pete Tomasi at ptomasi@foley.com, or Hillary Vedvig at hvedvig@foley.com.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.