Attorney General Bonta Leads Multistate Coalition to Defend NHTSA’s Fuel-Economy Standards for Passenger Vehicles and Trucks

OAKLAND - On behalf of California and leading a multistate coalition of 15 attorneys general, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed an amicus brief in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in support of the National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHTSA)'s fuel-economy standards for passenger cars, light trucks, and heavy-duty trucks. The NHTSA standards are designed to enhance fuel efficiency for vehicles and benefit consumers across the country. Currently, Republican-led states and oil industry groups are not only challenging these federal fuel-economy standards but also using their lawsuit to attack California's unrelated zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) standards. The amicus brief explains why that attack on state-law emission standards-designed to reduce smog-forming and planet-warming air pollution-has no place in a challenge to federal-law fuel efficiency standards.

"Efficient vehicles and clean vehicles should not be partisan issues. Yet, we continue to see politically motivated attacks," said Attorney General Bonta. "We are at a critical juncture in protecting our people and the environment, and that's why, I, alongside attorneys general nationwide, are unwavering in our commitment to defend these standards that will better protect our communities."

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) requires NHTSA to prescribe Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards at the "maximum feasible" average fuel economy level that manufacturers can achieve. These standards are intended to conserve fuel, which, in turn, saves consumers money at the pump, insulates the U.S. from global oil price instability, and reduces the impact of oil consumption on public health and the environment. Last June, NHTSA announced updated standards for model years 2027 to 2031 requiring automakers to achieve higher fuel efficiency across their fleets of cars as well as light and heavy-duty trucks. NHTSA projects that the 2027-31 standards will save consumers nearly $23 billion in fuel costs by reducing gasoline consumption by about 70 billion gallons, which will also prevent 710 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions through 2050.

In trying to undo those fuel-economy standards, the challengers argue NHTSA is required to develop CAFE standards as if the millions of electric vehicles that automakers sell do not exist. That fiction would lead to artificially low, do-nothing standards, and NHTSA was right to reject it. The challengers also fault NHTSA's model of the auto industry for recognizing that automakers are already selling electric vehicles at levels consistent with California's ZEV standards. The challengers have used NHTSA's modeling as an excuse to attempt to shoehorn into their lawsuit a claim that California's ZEV standards are unlawful based on a baseless theory that courts rejected over a decade ago.

California's ZEV standards are a critical component of California's vehicle emissions program that protects Californians against the health and environmental effects of vehicle exhaust pollutants including ozone, particulate matter, and toxic emissions. These emission standards have nothing to do with federal fuel-economy standards, and the Clean Air Act explicitly allows California to set its own vehicle emissions standards. The Clean Air Act also allows other states to adopt those standards for themselves if they choose.

In the amicus brief, the coalition expresses support for NHTSA's stringent fuel-economy standards while defending California's ZEV standards against the challengers' improper collateral attack. Specifically, the amicus brief highlights that a federal rule challenge is the wrong place to attack state laws.

Attorney General Bonta leads the attorneys general of Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia in filing this amicus brief.

A copy of the amicus brief can be found here.