California’s ambitious targets for electric car adoption to lower greenhouse gas emissions have faced opposition from energy companies, corn growers, and industry associations. In an attempt to challenge the state’s campaign to fight climate change, opponents have taken their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. This move represents the latest effort in a long-standing battle against strong environmental regulations in California, which has historically held the power to request a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set stricter vehicle emissions regulations compared to the federal standard. The unique factors of the nation’s most populous state, such as geography and a high number of vehicles, have made smog a more severe issue in California than in other states.
### The Background of California’s Environmental Regulations
Opponents of California’s environmental regulations have cited concerns about the state operating as a “quasi-federal regulator” on global climate change, particularly in relation to the Advanced Clean Car program for model years 2015 through 2025. The Diamond plaintiffs, including Valero Energy Corp’s Diamond Alternative Energy, have referred to the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA to support their case. This decision established the “major questions” doctrine, which emphasizes the need for explicit congressional authorization before regulators can take significant actions on issues of substantial economic, political, and societal consequence. California Governor Gavin Newsom has expressed his commitment to positioning the state as a leader in combatting climate change, with an emphasis on reducing emissions from the transportation sector.
### Legal Challenges and Questions Raised by Opponents
Legal challenges from oil companies, farming groups, trucking firms, and business associations have surfaced in both state and federal courts in an effort to halt California’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across various vehicle types. The Clean Air Act, the primary legislation governing tailpipe emissions rules, does not explicitly address greenhouse gas emissions from mobile sources like cars and trucks. Plaintiffs in the recent Supreme Court filing have argued that California does not meet the legal requirement for “compelling and extraordinary” provisions that would justify an EPA waiver. They have contended that climate change is a global issue rather than a localized one, and therefore, California’s independent emissions standards are unnecessary in the broader context of addressing global climate change.
### Implications of California’s Emissions Standards on the Nation
The question of whether California has the authority to establish greenhouse gas emissions standards for itself and other states is deemed a significant issue by the plaintiffs, particularly in light of the state’s EPA waiver request to end gasoline-only vehicle sales by 2035. The filing highlights concerns about the potential impact of transitioning from liquid-fuel-powered vehicles to electric vehicles, which could reduce demand for petroleum fuels and biofuels. Plaintiffs in the case include American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, Kansas Corn Growers Association, and the National Association of Convenience Stores.
In summary, the legal battle over California’s environmental regulations for vehicle emissions represents a complex and contentious issue with implications for both the state and the nation as a whole. The outcome of the Supreme Court review could have far-reaching consequences for the future of climate change mitigation efforts and regulatory authority in the environmental sector.