The U.S. Senate has voted to overturn California\u2019s landmark plan to ban the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035, delivering a major blow to the state\u2019s clean air ambitions and igniting a legal and political firestorm. The 51-44 vote, mostly along party lines, follows a similar move by the House and sends the measure to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This decision would nullify three waivers granted to California by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Biden administration. These waivers had allowed the state to move ahead with its aggressive zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) rules, including mandates on cars and diesel trucks. Now, California\u2019s decades-long authority to set stricter emissions standards than the federal government is at risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
California\u2019s plan, announced in 2022 and finalized with EPA waivers in late 2023, aimed to gradually phase out gas-only vehicles. The state mandated that:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
These regulations also included the Advanced Clean Trucks rule<\/strong>, which required truck manufacturers to hit increasing targets for electric truck sales between 2024 and 2035, and separate rules aimed at drastically cutting nitrogen oxide emissions from trucks and buses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The rules were adopted by 11 other states and Washington D.C.<\/strong>, covering about a third of the U.S. auto market<\/strong>, making the plan one of the most ambitious vehicle electrification efforts in the world.<\/p>\n\n\n\n California officials have vowed to fight back. Governor Gavin Newsom called the Senate vote \u201can unconstitutional attack\u201d and warned that California would not back down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWe won\u2019t stand by as Trump Republicans make America smoggy again,\u201d Newsom said at a press conference, pointing to the state’s legal authority under the Clean Air Act of 1967.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Attorney General Rob Bonta announced that the state will sue, arguing that the Congressional Review Act does not apply to EPA waivers, which are not regulations but administrative permissions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThis federal government overreach is illogical, politically motivated, and comes at the expense of Californian lives,\u201d Bonta said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Health and environmental advocates also pushed back hard. Will Barrett of the American Lung Association warned that the vote \u201cis a major blow to public health protections delivered under the Clean Air Act.\u201d Dan Becker from the Center for Biological Diversity called it \u201cthe first major legislative battle in Trump\u2019s war on the environment.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Senator Alex Padilla, who grew up in the smog-heavy San Fernando Valley, told colleagues he remembered school closures due to air pollution. \u201cThis is personal,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Representative Adam Schiff accused Senate Republicans of \u201cdoing the bidding of the oil industry\u201d after Trump reportedly asked for $1 billion in campaign contributions from oil executives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Republican senators and some moderate Democrats said the rules were overly ambitious and out of touch with real-world economic and technological limitations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming called the EV mandates \u201cfantasy land,\u201d saying, \u201cAmerica can\u2019t meet these impossible standards, not next year, not in 10 years.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia said she supported electric vehicles but not mandates. \u201cConsumers should be able to purchase the vehicle of their choice,\u201d she said. \u201cThese mandates replace the will of the people with the will of government.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n John Bozzella, president of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents automakers like GM, Toyota, and Stellantis, argued that California\u2019s mandates were never achievable and would have forced automakers to buy regulatory credits from Tesla. \u201cThe concerns were about the mandate \u2014 not the technology,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some auto manufacturers have struggled to meet EV sales targets. While 23% of new vehicles sold in California this year were zero-emission, that\u2019s slightly down from 25% in 2024, due in part to declining Tesla sales. Many other states are far below those levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Legally, this move is shaky. Both the Senate Parliamentarian and the Government Accountability Office warned that Congress cannot use the Congressional Review Act to revoke Clean Air Act waivers. The waivers are not classified as regulations and are already in effect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite that, the Senate voted to override this legal interpretation in a procedural vote Wednesday night. \u201cWe\u2019re just in completely new territory,\u201d said UCLA law professor Ann Carlson. \u201cCongress seems to be willing to use a statute that doesn\u2019t apply. We\u2019ve never seen this before.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n California is now preparing a legal challenge that could take months or years to resolve. In the meantime, the state may shift toward incentive-based programs, offering rebates to consumers or subsidies to automakers. But California faces a $12 billion budget shortfall, limiting its options.<\/p>\n\n\n\n California leads the U.S. in electric vehicle adoption, and its stricter rules have historically driven innovation across the country. If the state’s authority is permanently stripped, the ripple effect could derail climate and air quality progress nationwide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The state also faces serious health risks. According to CalMatters, some areas in Los Angeles still have over 100 days of unhealthy air each year, especially in low-income communities. Transportation remains the single largest source of greenhouse gases in California.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The federal Clean Air Act gave California unique authority to lead on pollution control because of its population, geography, and severe air quality issues. Since 1970, the EPA has never revoked a waiver granted to California \u2014 until now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As the legal fight begins, the political divide over clean vehicle policy is only deepening. Trump\u2019s allies are using every tool at their disposal to dismantle the Biden-era climate agenda, while California and its backers are preparing to defend what they see as a cornerstone of public health and environmental leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThis isn\u2019t just about cars,\u201d said Becker of the Center for Biological Diversity. \u201cIt\u2019s about who decides what kind of future we build \u2014 Washington or the people breathing California\u2019s air.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n NP Editor: <\/strong> Elections have consequences. This is a major shift against California’s manipulation of culture and in favor of Trump’s view of the world.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The U.S. Senate has voted to overturn California\u2019s landmark plan to ban the sale of new gas-powered vehicles by 2035, delivering a major blow to the state\u2019s clean air ambitions and igniting a legal and political firestorm. The 51-44 vote, mostly along party lines, follows a similar move by the House and sends the measure to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it. This decision would nullify three waivers granted to California by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":6119,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,7,11,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6118","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-democrats","category-economy","category-gas-oil","category-politics"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/fastdhrasdf.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6118","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6118"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6118\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6121,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6118\/revisions\/6121"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/6119"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nakedpolitics.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Supporters Say This Was Key to a Cleaner Future<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Critics Call the Mandates Unrealistic and Costly<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Can This Actually Stick?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
What\u2019s at Stake?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n