The Strategic Rollback of EV Regulations

President Trump has made a series of promises to eliminate what he describes as the “Biden electric vehicle mandate.” His commitment was showcased through a day-one executive order aimed at dismantling this mandate. However, this executive order marks the onset of a broader strategy aimed at repealing key regulatory actions from the Biden administration.

Key Regulatory Components at Play

To effectively eliminate the de facto electric vehicle (EV) mandate, three significant regulatory frameworks require reassessment or repeal. These include:

• The tailpipe emissions standards instituted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
• The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards enforced by the EPA and the Department of Transportation (DoT).
• The Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) regulation from California, which received a waiver from the Clean Air Act during Biden’s final weeks in office.

Among these components, the California ACC II regulation holds considerable importance as it has implemented measures—such as the prohibition of internal combustion vehicles—that exceed federal jurisdiction.

Interconnected Regulations and Their Impact

While each regulatory aspect does not singularly create a mandate for electric vehicles, their combined effect forms a substantial de facto mandate by selectively pushing non-battery-electric vehicles out of the market. The EPA’s tailpipe emissions standards establish limits so stringent that only fully battery-electric vehicles qualify. Similarly, the CAFE standards impose fuel economy targets that necessitate a considerable shift towards electric vehicles for automakers.

The California Waiver and Its Broader Implications

The ramifications of California’s regulatory decisions extend beyond its borders. Under the Clean Air Act, other states are permitted to adopt California’s stricter regulations, with 18 states already implementing facets of its EV mandate. This proliferation illustrates California’s influence, which has compelled manufacturers to align with these state-led initiatives.

Legal and Regulatory Challenges

Many of the mandates issued by the EPA and DoT could be seen as overreaching, possibly exceeding the statutory authorization granted to these agencies. Critics argue that neither agency possesses the jurisdiction to impose direct electric vehicle mandates. Instead, these regulations purport to be technology-neutral despite having profound implications for automaker strategies.

Legal challenges against both the tailpipe emissions standards and CAFE regulations are expected, compounded by the ongoing efforts of the Trump administration to reassess these regulations.

California’s Role in the National Mandate Framework

The pivot point for both federal mandates hinges on California’s ACC II program, chiefly characterized by its ban on internal combustion engines. The federal agencies are operating on the assumption that California’s regulations will be implemented; as a result, they argue that compliance costs for automakers will be marginal since these manufacturers will already be adhering to California’s strict standards.

A Path Forward: Revoking the Waiver

To dismantle the Biden EV mandate effectively, the most critical step involves the revocation of California’s waiver. Although there are structured procedures for withdrawing a previously granted waiver, legal ambiguities may arise, and the process is likely to be prolonged. An alternative approach could involve Congressional disapproval via the Congressional Review Act, which could promptly halt the California program and disrupt the foundation of the Biden administration’s EV strategy.