Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government Transportation United States

California Leads States In Suing the EPA For Attacking Vehicle Emissions Standards (theverge.com) 247

California, along with seventeen other states, announced a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency today over its recent rollback of Obama-era vehicle emissions and fuel economy standards. The states argue that the EPA "acted arbitrarily and capriciously" in overturning the previous administration's decision. The Verge reports: The standards in question were drawn up in 2009 and adopted in 2012. They laid out a path for automakers to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by reaching an average fleet fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2024. Since the program was charting a course that stretched out more than a decade into the future, it was written into the rules that the EPA would have to perform a "mid-term evaluation" before April 1st, 2018. This review would serve two purposes: assess whether automakers were on track, and then use that information to determine if the last section of the standards (which apply to model year 2022-2025 cars) were still feasible.

The EPA, under Barack Obama, kicked off this review process ahead of schedule in the summer of 2016 when it published an extensive 1,200-page technical assessment that analyzed whether the standards were working. In January 2017, the outgoing EPA wrapped this evaluation and determined that the bar was not set too high. In fact, it argued, automakers were overwhelmingly compliant. The Trump EPA's decision in April did not set new standards -- it simply argued that there were problems with the existing standards. In the meantime, the agency and the Department of Transportation are currently working together to craft and officially propose new standards. But the previous standards that the EPA said were inappropriate will technically remain in place until that happens.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Leads States In Suing the EPA For Attacking Vehicle Emissions Standards

Comments Filter:
  • Trump's election to POTUS has to be the mark of the golden age for lawyers. Sooooo many lawsuits from every direction, aimed at so many facets of Trump's administration. Wow.

    Law school graduates definitely having no problem finding work, I imagine.

    Just as a point of reference, as a general rule of thumb, most lawsuits filed in court, are vetted extensively before hand and are not even considered for presentation to a court unless the plaintiff has a fairly high confidence they will prevail.

    As another inte

  • Rules and Abuse (Score:4, Insightful)

    by duke_cheetah2003 ( 862933 ) on Tuesday May 01, 2018 @10:54PM (#56539568) Homepage

    Everyone should think about this every time the Trump administration 'rolls back' some rule or regulation.

    Someone got hurt, was poisoned, sold a shoddy product, swindled, defrauded, or otherwise injured by some one else, and in the course of remedying the situation, a rule or regulation was enacted to prevent another person from being injured in the same way by the same negligence or willful act that caused that injury.

    At the time the rule or regulation was enacted, it seemed like a good idea. Just remember that, at the time, it seemed like a good idea. And someone or many someone were probably hurt that gave rise to the rule or regulation.

    • At the time the rule or regulation was enacted, it seemed like a good idea. Just remember that, at the time, it seemed like a good idea.

      Yeah I know. We solved all the pollution issues, and exposed global warming for the Chinese conspiracy that it was, so environmental regulations no longer seem like a good idea. They were just a relic from an era of stupidity. *cough*. No that wasn't me coughing due to sarcasm it's just my lungs are really irritated *cough* *cough* and I don't know why.

      'muerika!

    • Re:Rules and Abuse (Score:5, Insightful)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) <mojo@world3.nBLUEet minus berry> on Wednesday May 02, 2018 @05:36AM (#56540410) Homepage Journal

      Yeah, but you also have to remember that every time a rule is introduced someone lost the opportunity to make some profit, had to pay for some safety gear, was forced to fit a filter, had to internalize a cost. That regulation injured someone's wallet. It was enacted to reduce someone's bottom line.

      And that someone was probably a major donor. /sarcasm

      • by Kjella ( 173770 )

        Yeah, but you also have to remember that every time a rule is introduced someone lost the opportunity to make some profit, had to pay for some safety gear, was forced to fit a filter, had to internalize a cost. That regulation injured someone's wallet. It was enacted to reduce someone's bottom line.

        Unless they just let shit flow downhill, do you think it's SUV manufacturers or SUV owners who get to bear the bulk of the cost? Of course you could say that's the right place to internalize it as it's the users who create the demand for the gas guzzlers but there's also a whole lot more of those than car company stock holders and they got the right to vote. And the math on this is seriously wonky, say VW cheated on their emissions test and didn't internalize the cost. Can we get an itemized bill showing wh

    • At the time the rule or regulation was enacted, it seemed like a good idea. Just remember that, at the time, it seemed like a good idea. And someone or many someone were probably hurt that gave rise to the rule or regulation.

      Alas, this is what happens when one tries to rule by rule/regulation rather than by law. The next guy gets to do the same, and his rules/regulations may not match your guy's ideas.

      IOW, the rules/regulations in question should have been codified in law by Congress, since what one Pres

Things equal to nothing else are equal to each other.

Working...