The people vs. Gavin Newsom’s mandate
As promised, President Donald Trump on Day One of his second term issued an executive order. Unleashing American Energy, that declared as U.S. policy an intention “to eliminate the ‘electric vehicle (EV) mandate’ and promote true consumer choice.”
But shortly after the Trump EPA sent its waiver cancellation request to Congress for review, the Government Accountability Office announced that Congress has not authority to review the Biden waiver or to revoke it. The GAO has thus created a difficult dilemma for the Trump Administration and for the millions of Americans who find the mandate unconscionable.
While the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, which created the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards, expressly preempts states from establishing their own fuel economy standards, Congress had given California the authority to set its own vehicle emissions standards in a 1967 clean air law, with one caveat: California standards require a waiver from the Environmental Protection Agency.
Under the Clean Air Act, though, the EPA can legally reject a California waiver only if it is “arbitrary or capricious” and thus unnecessary or technologically infeasible. Historically, not a single California waiver has ever been revoked, and CARB claims there is no process within the Clean Air Act to reject a waiver. Moreover, when President Trump in 2019 sought to end its authority to set its own emissions and mileage rules, California and 22 other states sued.
In one of his last official acts, President Joe Biden last December granted California a new waiver that authorizes its mandate to require 35% of new 2026 model cars and light trucks sold in California to be zero-emission vehicles. Those numbers jump to 60% by 2030 and 100% by 2035. When Biden in 2022 approved a waiver for earlier California emissions rules, auto manufacturers and 14 states went to court.
The battle over zero-emission vehicle mandates is not restricted to California, because other states can follow California regulations once the state receives a waiver from the EPA. To date, 18 states have followed at least parts of the new California mandate, and the Golden State has put pressure on auto manufacturers to both follow and defend its unpopular regulations.
There are just two problems with the increasingly unpopular EV mandate. First, it appears that the only way for California to meet its 2026 milestone is to revise it downward. The California New Car Dealers Association reports that zero emission vehicles’ market share fell to 21.3% in the fourth quarter of 2024, down from 23.7% in the prior quarter for an annual average of 22% (barely above the 21.7% in 2023).
Second, nationwide polls show that 75% of Americans oppose any kind of gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicle ban. Public support in California for its mandate peaked at 55% in 2022 (with 39% opposed) but has been slipping in the wake of a 20% increase in electricity rates that have resulted in much higher costs for recharging EV batteries. EV sales in California fell from 447,000 in 2023 to just 387,000 in 2024.
But as long as the mandate stands, it will punish both auto manufacturers and auto buyers for not bowing to Governor Newsom’s whims. Automakers face penalties of $20,000 per noncompliant vehicle sold, with the only alternatives buying emission credits for EV-only manufacturers or limiting their inventories of gasoline and diesel vehicles.
This will force Californians to either buy an EV or just hold onto older vehicles longer – limiting their choices significantly. Similar penalties and limitations on consumer choice are looming in many other cities and states. One can only imagine the anger and frustration. (Meanwhile, formerly popular Teslas are now being blown to bits by radical supporters of EV mandates.)
The Institute for Energy Research’s Kenny Stein says that the sheer size of the California market (and that of the states that conform to California standards) means that automakers must either make their entire fleet California-compliant or sell different car lines in different states – a near economic impossibility. This forces citizens of other states to purchase more expensive vehicles and thereby subsidize California’s regulatory choices against their will.
But, adds Stein, ending the mandate requires revising or rejecting three major regulatory actions: EPA’s tailpipe emissions standards, the CAFÉ standards, and California’s Advanced Clean Cars II regulations for which the Biden EPA granted a waiver (that the GAO says Congress cannot overturn). Unlike President Obama, it appears, President Trump cannot eliminate this unpopular mandate “with a pen and a phone.”
Europeans, who started the ZEV crusade, have also been unable to meet their own mandate milestones. The EU, like California, has banned non-EV sales as of 2035 (with possible exceptions for hydrogen-powered vehicles). One result is that European automakers are terrified that cheap Chinese EVs will drive them into bankruptcy.
As with California, 23 of the 27 EU nations, including Germany, Italy, and France, missed their national climate targets under the Effort Sharing Regulation. This means they may face heavy financial penalties if they are unwilling or unable to purchase increasingly expensive carbon credits. But like Governor Newsom, the Europeans have not let the facts – or the cost – interfere with their zeal to be first to reach zero.
On top of the public outcry against mandates, California and the nation face the very real threat that Zombie-like adherence to the EV mandate will collapse the electric grid – rendering the EV totally undriveable. Add to that longer repair times, the high cost of replacement batteries, the growing fear of EV fires, and a host of other concerns.
Only time will tell whether pro-EV lawfare will prevent California – and much of the nation – from continuing its lemming-like march toward the cliff. The 25% are hell bent on forcing the 75% to jump with them, while the 75% only want to be free to make their own choices.
Meanwhile, the Gavinator’s own presumed desire to move to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in 2029 has hit a bump in the road, as he is learning any step toward the center will unleash the vehement anger of the Democratic base.