Judge set to vaporize EPA bid to end California emissions standards

The Justice Department largely centered its defense of the EPA’s conduct on the Congressional Review Act, which allows for an expedited review of agency rules as outlined in Project 2025.WASHINGTON (CN) — A federal judge on Wednesday signaled she’s likely to block the Environmental Protection Agency’s effort to nullify California’s Clean Air Act waivers, which that allows the state to enact stricter emissions standards than the federal government.Senior U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell expressed concern over the Justice Department’s position that any agency could effectively enlist Congress to undo longstanding regulations by reclassifying them as final rules and employing an expedited review process under the Congressional Review Act, a plan specifically laid out in the controversial Project 2025.The exception at issue, known as the California waiver, was enacted in 1970s to address the dangerous levels of smog in Los Angeles and throughout the Golden State. It has since evolved to make the state a “laboratory of innovation” where automakers can test new technology.When Congress passed the Clean Air Act in 1967, California faced significant air quality and pollution problems that the federal emission standards were unlikely to address. However, at that time, California was the only state with its own vehicle emission standards and its regulations had helped craft federal law.Taking both California’s unique situation and automakers’ concerns about a patchwork system of emission standards across all 50 states, Congress created the California waiver directly in the Clean Air Act, balancing both issues.Howell, a Barack Obama appointee, heard arguments in a lawsuit brought by California on June 22, seeking a preliminary injunction to order the EPA to withdraw its reclassification of waivers from 2009, 2013, 2022 and 2024 that put them up for congressional review.Margaret Meckenstock with the California Attorney General’s Office argued Wednesday that Congress never would have passed the Congressional Review Act if it allowed executive agencies to suddenly change adjudicatory orders into final rules, and vice-versa.If the statute is interpreted as going that far, it would “write the EPA out of the U.S. Code,” Meckenstock said.Howell described the government’s position as seeming to allow any agency to “willy-nilly decide what’s a rule and what isn’t,” adding that this process opened the door to private interests — such as the American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufactures, which intervened in this case — to push such deregulation.Justice Department attorney Robert Stander argued California had no avenue to challenge the EPA’s action of providing a report to Congress suggesting the waivers should be reclassified, and had no cause until lawmakers issued a joint resolution of disapproval that would then invalidate the rule.Further, the state had brought its challenge in the wrong court, suggesting instead it would have to wait until Congress acts to challenge the decision in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals — where the state currently has a pending challenge to the waiver reclassification as of Aug. 11. Stander pointed to the Clean Air Act itself, which channels to the appellate courts.Howell noted a stark difference in the length of procedural review under the Congressional Review Act and the normal legislative process, with the latter requiring many more steps.According to the Environmental & Energy Law Program at Harvard Law, the use of the Congressional Review Act increased dramatically in 2025. Before the past year, Congress had only used the statute once before 2017, 16 times in 2017 and three times in 2021. In 2025, Congress used it 22 times.According to California, if the EPA’s reclassifications are ultimately upheld and the waivers can be considered rules subject to congressional review, the agency will have “eviscerated” the state’s right to contest further revocations.The Trump administration revoked the exception in 2019 as part of its wide-reaching rollback of efforts to fight climate change. Then-EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the rule worked against the idea of federalism by allowing a single state to dictate standards for the nation.President Joe Biden reinstated the rule in March 2022. A group of red states and fuel industry groups then sued in May 2022 challenging the rule.In September 2022, the California Air Resources Board passed a new set of regulations that essentially require all vehicles sold in the state to be either electric, hydrogen-fueled or at least plug-in hybrid by 2035. Soon after, 17 states adopted similar rules.In April 2024, D.C. Circuit panel unanimously rejected an effort by 17 red states and fuel industry groups seeking to overturn the California waiver. The panel found that so long as California’s emission standards are at least as protective as federal regulations, the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to affirm them, unless they are deemed unnecessary or otherwise problematic.“In other words, the federal regulations continue to act as the floor for emissions regulations, but California can seek to enact its own more stringent regulatory program above those federal requirements,” the panel wrote.In December 2024, the Supreme Court rejected the states’ appeal and upheld the D.C. Circuit ruling.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads