10 hours ago
Trump Transportation Secretary Calls Fuel Economy Standards 'Illegal,' Pushes to Revise Them
It looks like the Trump administration's fight against electric vehicles and alternative fuels has sprouted a proxy battle over Federal fuel economy standards. On top of recently proposed taxes on EVs—as opposed to tax incentives for purchasing them—and attempting to axe California's EPA waiver allowing it to set its own pollution standards, Republicans' 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' aims to remove financial penalties that punish automakers for exceeding government-set fuel economy standards, while also relaxing those same standards. On Friday, the Administration's Transportation Secretary, Sean Duffy, seemingly putting forth a pretext to undo the Biden-era fuel economy rules, says those rules were 'illegal.'
The sharp statement is likely the administration's opening move to reset the standards, per an Associated Press report. In the mentioned rule memorandum sent by Duffy, the Transportation Secretary said, 'We are making vehicle more affordable and easier to manufacture in the United States' by removing those standards. The Biden-era rules mandated that the CAFE average must meet a fleet-wide 49 mpg standard by 2031 in annual increments of two percent for passenger cars starting in 2027 and light trucks and SUVs starting in 2029.
A statement by the Alliance for Automotive Innovation welcomed the news stating it was a 'positive development and important clarity from the Department of Transportation' and says it repeated that the Biden Administration rules were 'improperly predicated' on alternative fuel vehicles. Transportation Secretary Duffy went further by stating that the use of EVs in calculating the rules was 'illegal' by ignoring 'statutory requirements' the barred consideration of EVs when setting the standards.
At this time, the revised rule hasn't changed the existing standards but it will allow the NHTSA to adjust CAFE standards moving forward. Since his confirmation, Transportation Secretary Duffy has pushed the NHTSA to reverse these rules as quickly as possible, though it's unclear how quickly that can happen given the typically required public comment period and other steps that must be taken when altering them.
It's possible that by labeling the existing rules as "illegal," Duffy could be reaching for a shortcut; after all, if the rules were implemented illegally, as he alleges, undoing them might be more straightforward than instituting a more conventional change. But we'll have to wait and see how this plays out—and whether any litigation sprouts up to challenge it.
