WASHINGTON (CN) — Federal law gives states the power to set their own standards on motor vehicle carbon emissions, a pair of Democratic lawmakers argued Tuesday, urging the D.C. Circuit to snuff out a challenge to fuel economy limits unveiled by the Biden administration.
The litigation consolidates separate lawsuits brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council, 11 Republican states and a trade group known as the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers. They have asked the D.C. Circuit to review a final rule from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that would increase emissions standards for cars and light trucks model years between 2024 and 2026.
The petitioners claim, among other things, that the administration highways authority ran afoul of the 1975 Energy Policy and Conservation Act or EPCA, the law that governs federal fuel economy standards.
In particular, the suit contends that there is conflict between the energy policy law and state-level emissions standards permitted by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act. The petitioners argue that those standards are preempted by the language of the EPCA, and that the NHTSA was abdicating its duty by not addressing such a contradiction.
The petitioners’ argument is targeted at an August rule approved by California regulators that would require 100% of new the vehicles sold in the Golden State by 2035 to produce no carbon emissions.
In response, two congressional Democrats said Tuesday that the court should ignore the contention.
“Motor vehicle air pollution standards—including, explicitly, California’s Zero-Emission Vehicles standards—are not preempted by EPCA, even if they affect fuel economy,” Delaware Senator Tom Carper and New Jersey Congressman Frank Pallone wrote in an amicus brief filed with the court.
The lawmakers say Congress was clear when writing the energy policy law that it would not replace state authority to set emissions standards under the Clean Air Act.
“Congress understood that the fuel-economy improvements it sought through EPCA could be affected by the vehicle-emissions standards created under Clean Air Act, either because emissions-reducing technology might directly impact fuel economy or because some manufacturers might not be able to improve on both fronts simultaneously,” the brief says. “But Congress struck the balance between these two aims in favor of public health and air-quality goals: it took steps in EPCA to prioritize Clean Air Act emissions reductions over fuel-economy improvements, not the other way around.”
The NHTSA also has no obligation to weigh in on California’s zero-emissions rule, Carper and Pallone wrote.
In a statement Tuesday, the lawmakers framed the challenge as an attempt by fossil fuel interests to block states from taking a stronger stance on emissions controls.
“Once again, Big Oil and its allies are trying to overturn our ability to support state adoption of protective vehicle-emissions standards,” said Pallone. “Congress has repeatedly reaffirmed EPA’s longstanding authority to protect public health and the environment from air pollution—including by permitting strong state vehicle-emissions standards.”
Carper argued that Congress has recently doubled down on its support for states’ authority to set their own clean air standards by greenlighting additional federal funding for such efforts under the August Inflation Reduction Act.
“Congress and the courts have been clear — the Clean Air Act authorizes states to set standards to limit air pollution, including greenhouse gases, from motor vehicles,” Carper wrote. “The Court should readily reject this ill-founded attempt to stop states from protecting their residents from dangerous air pollution from motor vehicles.”
The NHTSA in January said it would unveil this month new fuel economy standards for the 2027 model year that could be even more stringent than the rule currently under legal scrutiny. The White House has said it is aiming to make electric or hybrid vehicles to make up around half of new sales by 2030.
Follow @BenjaminSWeiss
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
