Skip to Content
Streetsblog California home
Streetsblog California home
Log In
Streetsblog California

California And Ten Other Friends Go to Battle with Trump Over EV’s

The plaintiffs in the suit are California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

As expected, President Donald Trump signed into law a resolution taking away California’s power to require that all sales of new vehicles in the state be electric or zero emission vehicles. As promised, California immediately challenged the legality of this action and was joined by 10 other states seeking relief from federal overreach.

While the president’s shock troops assaulted one of California’s United States Senators, Trump was signing into law a trio of resolutions - each rescinding a waiver granted by the EPA - that the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office and Senate Parliamentarian have opined have no legal weight.  

The most notable of those waivers allowed California to mandate that, by 2035, at least 80 percent of new vehicles sold in the state be electric, with the remainder being plug-in hybrids. The other waivers two had to do with EV and zero-emission conversion of the freight industry.

California alone has the right to set its own clean air standards because it created state standards before the federal government began setting national standards. However, other states can choose to follow California’s standards rather than the federal ones.

Automakers praised the signing, which the President claimed “liberated” the industry. California and the other plaintiffs were not impressed.

"The Federal Government carried out an illegal playbook designed to evade lawful procedures that might prevent the 'take down' of disfavored California laws," the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in northern California, reads.

At issue is whether or not the federal government can rescind a waiver without going through regular legislative procedures. Republican legislators chose to use powers granted under the Congressional Review Act, which is not something that can be filibustered in the Senate (thus only 51 Senators are needed to approve the change instead of 60). 

The plaintiffs in the suit are California, Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog California

Friday’s Headlines

Today's headlines are dominated by the shocking assault on California by the federal government,

June 13, 2025

Talking Headways Podcast: Creating Positive Soundscapes in Cities

Chris Berdik on health and wellbeing, how our brains process sound and creating positive urban soundscapes.

June 13, 2025

Eliminating Municipal Parking Requirements Does Not Equate To Zero-Parking Homes

No, the Blumenfield-Raman parking reform motion will not result in a proliferation of "parking-free developments"

June 12, 2025

SFMTA Leaves Valencia Bike Lanes Unfinished

The center-running lane is long gone and some finishing touches are coming to the parking-protected section from 15th to 23rd, but the lack of concrete infrastructure remains problematic. And then there's the last four blocks from 23rd to Cesar Chavez, which is still just a striped lane wedged between parked cars and moving traffic.

June 12, 2025

Op/Ed: California’s Momentum on Transportation Emission Reductions Stops Here?

California policymakers have a number of tools at their disposal to help address the weakening of the very climate policies they put in place.

June 12, 2025

Thursday’s Headlines

Trump looks to make it official, ICE raids and protests continue, No Kings Day this weekend and more...

June 12, 2025
See all posts