Supreme Court Refuses to Pause California EV Mandate Case

NACS previously told the Court it had concerns about pausing the mandate lawsuit.

February 07, 2025

The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with NACS’ position and declined on Thursday to place a dispute over California's standards for vehicle emissions and electric cars on hold even as President  Trump's administration considers policy shifts that touch upon pending litigation at the nation's highest judicial body, reported Reuters.

“The justices denied the administration's request to pause further action in the case, as well as two cases concerning which courts may hear challenges to EPA rules,” wrote the news outlet.

On December 13, the justices agreed to hear the dispute over California's vehicle standards, which involves a 2022 exception given to that state by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency during Biden's presidency to national vehicle emission standards set by the agency under the Clean Air Act anti-pollution law.

In asking the Supreme Court to pause the case, Acting Solicitor General Sarah Harris had said in a January 24 filing, "After the change in administration, EPA's acting administrator has determined that the agency should reassess the basis for and soundness of the 2022 reinstatement decision,” wrote Reuters.

In December 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday granted a petition filed by NACS and its coalition partners in a case challenging the state of California’s Advanced Clean Cars I rule.

The California rule set standards requiring 22% of new vehicles sold in the state to be “zero emission” in model year 2025. The rule was a precursor to pending California rules that over time would require 100% of new vehicles sold in California to be “zero emission.”

For California to set its own rules, it must be granted a waiver to do so by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Those waivers are supposed to be based upon the specific air quality needs in California. Instead, California asked for a waiver based on its concern about global climate change, not California-specific air quality.

NACS previously told the Court it had concerns about pausing the case and presented evidence that picking one technology over others leads to worse outcomes for the environment and the economy.