California's Ban on Gas-Powered Cars is Dead
Senate Republicans pull a rarely used lever
Senate Republicans last Thursday voted to repeal California's rule banning the sale of new gasoline-powered vehicles by 2035. The 51-44 vote, pushed through using the Congressional Review Act, nullifies a waiver granted under the Clean Air Act — something Congress has never done in the law's 50-year history.
California's rule was part of an aggressive plan to shift the auto market toward electric vehicles, and 11 other states had intended to adopt it. Together, those states represent about 40% of U.S. auto sales. The decision marks a major victory for the oil and gas industry and a setback for climate advocates hoping to use state-level policy to push the national market toward cleaner technologies.
Democrats cry foul as legal battle begins
Governor Gavin Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta said the state would sue the Trump administration over what they called an 'unlawful' congressional action. 'This is about our economy, it's about our health, it's about our global competitiveness,' Newsom said. 'It is, Donald Trump, about our national security, and it's about our ability to continue to innovate and outpace competition all across the globe.'
California Attorney General Rob Bonta and California Governor Gavin Newsom. —
Source: Getty
Legal experts argue that the Congressional Review Act should not apply to California's waivers, which only affect one state. But Republicans said California's standards essentially dictated national policy, given how many automakers follow them.
More votes, more damage to California's climate agenda
The Senate also voted to block California rules requiring half of new trucks sold by 2035 to be electric and limiting emissions of nitrogen oxide, a key contributor to smog. All three measures passed the House earlier this year and are expected to be signed into law by President Trump. In response, Senator Alex Padilla of California placed a hold on several EPA nominees and warned of future retaliation. 'All bets will be off' next time Democrats hold a majority, he said.
With two Rivian R1S SUVs in the background, a sign reading 'Vehicle Charging only' is seen in front of a charger that is part of the Rivian Adventure Network charging station on May 10, 2025, in Buttonwillow, California.
While some automakers, like Ford and Honda, had agreed to California's emission standards, the industry as a whole pushed back against the 2035 mandate. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation said the targets were 'never achievable,' citing infrastructure gaps and market readiness. Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan was the lone Democrat to vote with Republicans, pointing to concerns from automakers in her state.
A Ford F-150 Lightning electric pickup truck is displayed for sale at a Ford dealership on August 21, 2024, in Glendale, California. —
Source:Final thoughts
The ruling leaves California scrambling to revise its climate strategy. Officials may look to cut emissions from factories and refineries or increase incentives for EV purchases. They may also consider penalties for gas car usage, such as higher registration fees.
But a clause in the Congressional Review Act prevents California from adopting any rule 'substantially the same' as the one just repealed — a potential legal roadblock that could tie the state's hands for years. 'We're going to have to think pretty innovatively,' said Dean Florez of the California Air Resources Board. 'But there will still be a massive hole.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's mass firings of federal workers must remain on hold, court rules
A federal appeals court ruled on Friday night that President Donald Trump 's orders for mass removals of federal staff and several agencies will remain on hold. The Trump administration had requested that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals freeze an earlier order from a lower court that put a stop to the mass firings at several agencies, CNN noted. The new court order is a significant step back for the president and his attempt to radically reduce the size of the federal government. The widespread firings, known as reductions in force (RIFs), have remained on hold since May 9, following the earlier ruling by U.S. District Judge Susan Illston stating that Trump needed congressional authorization for such a wholesale makeover of the federal government. The three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit stated in a two-to-one ruling that Trump's executive order in question 'far exceeds the President's supervisory powers under the Constitution.' The majority found that the challengers could succeed on the merits of their arguments that the mass firings were illegal, and argued that the administration didn't manage to meet the other factors that would have prompted an emergency appellate intervention. The president had previously requested that the Supreme Court take on the case. That request didn't go anywhere initially. It's likely, however, that the issue will end up before the top court in the land once more. The case was put forward by unions representing federal employees, outside groups, and local governments. They challenged the executive order Trump signed in February, which called for a widespread restructuring of the government, along with directives from the Office of Personnel Management and the Office of Management and Budget to enact the president's policy. The offices asked that agencies send in plans for how they would implement Trump's order to slash the workforce. The challengers argued that both OPM and OMB were making the final decisions on the size of the firings for each agency. They put forward evidence that proposals for less radical cuts were being shot down, making the firings illegal. The lawsuit also took aim at the involvement of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The agencies covered by the previous ruling by Illston, halting the firings, include almost every cabinet department, such as the departments of Energy, Health and Human Services, Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, Interior, State, Labor, and Treasury. The 9th Circuit said on Friday that Congress, not the president, gave agencies the power to enact widespread firings. Bill Clinton appointee, Senior Circuit Judge William Fletcher, said in the majority ruling that the 'kind of reorganization contemplated by the Order has long been subject to Congressional approval.' Fletcher was joined in the majority by a Joe Biden appointee, Circuit Judge Lucy Koh. Dissenting from the ruling was George W. Bush appointee Circuit Judge Consuelo Maria Callahan, who wrote that 'the President has the right to direct agencies, and OMB and OPM to guide them, to exercise their statutory authority to lawfully conduct RIFs.' 'We are gratified by the court's decision today to allow the pause of these harmful actions to endure while our case proceeds,' the groups challenging the president's orders said in a statement, CNN noted.
BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Hegseth: US will stand by Indo-Pacific allies against ‘imminent' China threat
US defence secretary Pete Hegseth reassured allies in the Indo-Pacific on Saturday that they will not be left alone to face increasing military and economic pressure from China, while insisting that they also contribute more to their own defence. He said Washington will bolster its defences overseas to counter what the Pentagon sees as rapidly developing threats by Beijing, particularly in its aggressive stance towards Taiwan. Advertisement China has conducted numerous exercises to test what a blockade would look like of the self-governing island, which Beijing claims as its own and the US has pledged to defend. China's army 'is rehearsing for the real deal', Mr Hegseth said in a keynote speech at a security conference in Singapore. 'We are not going to sugarcoat it — the threat China poses is real. And it could be imminent.' China has a stated goal of having its military have the capability to take Taiwan by force if necessary by 2027, a deadline that is seen by experts as more of an aspirational goal than a hard war deadline. Advertisement But China also has built sophisticated man-made islands in the South China Sea to support new military outposts and developed highly advanced hypersonic and space capabilities, which are driving the US to create its own space-based Golden Dome missile defences. Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue, a global security conference hosted by the International Institute for Security Studies, Mr Hegseth said China is no longer just building up its military forces to take Taiwan, it's 'actively training for it, every day'. Mr Hegseth repeated a pledge made by previous administrations to bolster US military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific (Anupam Nath/AP) Mr Hegseth also called out China for its ambitions in Latin America, particularly its efforts to increase its influence over the Panama Canal. He urged countries in the region to increase defence spending to levels similar to the 5% of their gross domestic product European nations are now pressed to contribute. Advertisement 'We must all do our part,' Mr Hegseth said. He also repeated a pledge made by previous administrations to bolster US military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific to provide a more robust deterrent. While both the Obama and Biden administrations had also committed to pivoting to the Pacific and established new military agreements throughout the region, a full shift has never been realised. Instead, US military resources from the Indo-Pacific have been regularly pulled to support military needs in the Middle East and Europe, especially since the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. Advertisement In the first few months of president Donald Trump's second term, that has also been the case. In the last few months the Trump administration has taken a Patriot missile defence battalion out of the Indo-Pacific in order to send it to the Middle East, a massive logistical operation that required more than 73 military cargo aircraft flights, and sent Coast Guard ships back to the US to help defend the US-Mexico border. Mr Hegseth was asked why the US pulled those resources if the Indo-Pacific is the priority theatre for the US. He did not directly answer but said the shift of resources was necessary to defend against Houthi missile attacks launched from Yemen, and to bolster protections against illegal immigration into the US. Advertisement At the same time, he stressed the need for American allies and partners to step up their own defence spending and preparations, saying the US was not interested in going it alone. 'Ultimately a strong, resolute and capable network of allies and partners is our key strategic advantage,' he said. 'China envies what we have together, and it sees what we can collectively bring to bear on defence, but it's up to all of us to ensure that we live up to that potential by investing.' The Indo-Pacific nations caught in between have tried to balance relations with both the US and China over the years. Beijing is the primary trading partner for many, but is also feared as a regional bully, in part due to its increasingly aggressive claims on natural resources such as critical fisheries. Mr Hegseth cautioned that playing both sides, seeking US military support and Chinese economic support, carries risk. 'Economic dependence on China only deepens their malign influence and complicates our defense decision space during times of tension,' Mr Hegseth said. China usually sends its own defence minister to this conference, but Dong Jun did not attend this year in a snub to the US and the erratic tariff war Mr Trump has ignited with Beijing, something the US delegation said it intended to capitalise on. 'We are here this morning. And somebody else isn't,' Mr Hegseth said. Mr Hegseth was asked by a member of the Chinese delegation, made up of lower level officers from the National Defence University, how committed it would be to regional alliances. In some, China has a more dominant influence. Mr Hegseth said the US would be open to engaging with any countries willing to work with it. 'We are not going to look only inside the confines of how previous administrations looked at this region,' he said. 'We're opening our arms to countries across the spectrum — traditional allies, non-traditional allies.' Mr Hegseth said committing US support for Indo-Pacific nations would not require local governments to align with the West on cultural or climate issues. It is not clear if the US can or wants to supplant China as the region's primary economic driver. But Mr Hegseth's push follows Mr Trump's visit to the Middle East, which resulted in billions of dollars in new defence agreements.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE The truth about Todd Chrisley's youthful post-prison appearance
Todd Chrisley has shocked fans with his youthful appearance following his release from prison – and now sources have claimed to that he's already squeezed in an emergency Botox appointment. The reality star, 56, and with his wife, Julie Chrisley, 52, received presidential pardons from Donald Trump on Wednesday and less than 24 hours later, he is said to have sought out cosmetic treatment to smooth out his wrinkles. Speaking exclusively to an insider close to the family claimed that the first thing Todd did after becoming a free man was pay a trip to an anesthetist for some tweakments to his face. According to the source, Todd jokingly hid his new face with shopping bags, as well as a hat and sunglasses, to keep the results under wraps. They said: 'You better bet that Todd's first visit was to the cosmetic surgeon. He was not about to be seen for the first time looking wrinkly. 'He wore a hat and sunglasses to cover up the massive amount of Botox he got on his forehead and his eyes. 'Todd has wanted this more than anything. This is also why he had a bag over his head. It is also why Savannah was laughing and said that her father hasn't aged a day. 'They made a mandatory stop at the Botox doc prior to their Nordstrom spree. 'He needed new clothes to go along with his new face. Todd is now ready to make his grand debut.' A representative for Todd declined to comment when contacted by Speculation of Todd's tweakments comes after social media users had pointed out his youthful visage following a spate of pictures and videos of him and daughter Savannah enjoying a shopping trip. 'How in the world did he come out of prison looking much younger?' one transfixed fan asked. 'He looks great, and we are so happy for your family Savannah.' 'He looks better than I've ever seen him honestly,' said another. A third commented: 'Looking good! Prison agreed with you! Stay off the Botox!' Todd and Julie were convicted in 2022 for orchestrating a $30 million bank fraud and tax evasion scheme. Julie was sentenced to serve in Kentucky until 2028, and Todd in Florida until 2032. But on Tuesday, Trump personally called their daughter, Savannah, from the Oval Office to inform her of his bombshell decision. 'It's a great thing because your parents are going to be free and clean,' a smiling Trump said during the phone call with Savannah. On Friday, Todd was joined by his daughter for his first press conference since his release. Speaking to reporters in Nashville, Tennessee, he admitted that he does not feel remorse over his conviction. 'I would have remorse if it was something that I did,' he said. 'The corruption that went on in our case is going to continue to unfold.' He also recalled the moment he found out he had been pardoned. 'I remember walking back from the phone and just feeling numb,' he said. 'Then after about 10 minutes all I could think about was the guys that I was leaving behind.' While Todd has been described as looking younger, his wife Julie has also undergone a transformation of her own. On Thursday, she was seen sporting brown and gray locks while leaving a butcher shop in Nashville in her first few hours as a free woman. The former Chrisley Knows Best star, who was known for her coiffed blonde do, grinned in the image first obtained by Fox News Digital.
