• Apr 29, 2011
Today, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's and the National Automobile Dealers Association's (NADA) challenge to California's rules that limit vehicle emissions was dismissed by a federal appeals court in Washington, D.C. The reason? The court stated (pdf) that it had no jurisdiction to rule over the case.
The Chamber claimed in a lawsuit that the Obama administration improperly created a patchwork of emissions standards by allowing California to impose its own rules. The Chamber, joined by NADA, challenged the waiver granted to California by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But, the federal appeals court stated, that wasn't enough:
Because the Chamber has not identified a single member who was or would be injured by EPA's waiver decision, it lacks standing to raise this challenge.
The waiver from Clean Air Act standards, issued back in 2009, pertains to emissions for vehicles manufactured between 2012 and 2016. Thirteen other states, along with the District of Columbia, have agreed to adopt California's more stringent standards. Automakers argue that this will force them to alter vehicles delivered to California and other states that have adopted the same emissions guidelines. NADA warns that dealerships may be unable to obtain certain vehicles because they don't comply with regulations.

[Source: Automotive News – sub. req.]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 24 Comments
      lne937s
      • 3 Years Ago
      BTW, that California and 13 other states (basically, West Coast, North East and a few other states) make up more than half the US population. So it isn't like they are making a special example for just a handful of people. Chances are many manufacturers sell more cars in those states than they do in many other countries with their own emission rules. Considering California, et al. are closer to EU and Japanese environmental standards, automakers would actually make their vehicles more globally relevant by just designing them for the more strict standards from the outset.
        xxxZOMBIExxx
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lne937s
        BTW Japan and the EU have different fuel quality standards that help the automakers meet emission requirements more easily in those market than in the U.S. Perhaps we should stop selling the 87 octane dishwater that passes for fuel in the country. The standards that C.A.R.B developed have done nothing the curb emissions or improve air quality and ignore the fuel quality issue completely. C.A.R.B is bought and paid for by the highest bidder. The majority of the Emissions standards in California (and now adopted by other states) are not focused on environmental improvements but are designed to generate revenue for state governments. Also, by population, California and New York are the only states the top ten most populated that adhere to California Emissions. This why we need a Federal standard for both emissions and fuel that supersedes states mandates and allows automakers to reduce the costs of building clean efficient cars through economies of scale. In this way both the environment and the consumer win.
          GoodCheer
          • 3 Years Ago
          @xxxZOMBIExxx
          "allows automakers to reduce the costs of building clean efficient cars through economies of scale." But the clean efficient cars would be the ones that ARE sold in all states, so they would have the economies of scale anyway. The fat dirty cars that don't meet CA muster are the only ones that would suffer from reduced market size and reduced economies of scale.
        Nick
        • 3 Years Ago
        @lne937s
        Right? more than 1/2 the population embraces the stronger standards, and the remainder desperately tries to block it and does its best to drag the country down to the stone age.
      harlanx6
      • 3 Years Ago
      California's government is out of control, and the most business unfriendly environment in the western hemisphere. Corporations are moving to Texas in droves, and I don't blame them. Who is going to pay the taxes when the only people left in California are fast food joints, government workers and people on various forms of government assistance. Businesses, get out while you can. Will the last business to leave please turn out the lights?
        Nick
        • 3 Years Ago
        @harlanx6
        Sad to see you've been brainwashed by neo-nazi television. It never ceases to amaze me what kind of nonsense you guys believe. And you come up with new stuff all the time!
          sk00chy
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Nick
          He's hardly brainwashed. You obviously never tried to do anything in California but be a lemming, which actually works out great here. Try anything else, and the government wants its piece even before you succeed.
          Nick
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Nick
          @sk00chy "I've never tried to do anything in California" ? What have you tried to do? Why don't you start whining a bit about socialism, marxism and ming-ism, with your "govt ants its piece before you succeed!" crap? Comments like yours make me believe mankind is splitting into sub-species. The normal, the dumb, and the super-dumb (you).
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Nick
          Typical elitist. Someone who doesn't agree with your ideology is automatically labeled by name-calling. Can't you just make your point without being childish?
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Nick
          @Nick I think you're only partially right, the subspecies seem to be the people who have civil discussions on the merits of each side, and then there are the name-callers like you... what crawled up your left-curved tailpipe today? Anyone who calls himself smart and someone else dumb in a debate... probably isn't the smart one, since that's all he's got.
        EJ
        • 3 Years Ago
        @harlanx6
        The joy of having the best climate mix in the country, you get to make your own rules and not worry about the people who complain. If they go, someone else will gladly take their place.
          lne937s
          • 3 Years Ago
          @EJ
          Actually, I think California has the most strict rules because it needs them the most. A lack of centralized planning has lead to massive inefficiencies. I was amazed by the choking smog in LA... and that's comming from someone who lives in NYC, not somewhere remote wilderness.
        skierpage
        • 3 Years Ago
        @harlanx6
        I don't see Silicon Valley, the Central Valley farmland, or Hollywood moving to Texas. Stop exaggerating.
      Nick
      • 3 Years Ago
      God bless California and the 13 other states participating.
      samagon0
      • 3 Years Ago
      didn't new york city recently get shut down from making their own emissions regulations, basically the reason was that the national government was the only place that emissions regulations could be created? maybe I am misremembering, but if I am remembering right, one of these rulings is wrong.
        samagon0
        • 3 Years Ago
        @samagon0
        ahha: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/03/03/supreme-court-strikes-down-bloombergs-hybrid-taxi-plan-for-nyc/ ~~~~ The court ruled that federal agencies have the sole right to regulate emissions and efficiency, not the mayor of one town – even if it is the City That Never Sleeps. ~~~~ the supreme court just recently denied to hear his appeal. in effect, standing by the judgement of the lower court. so which is right? This ruling, which goes directly against the decision of the NYC case, or this one?
      sk00chy
      • 3 Years Ago
      Screw California. I had to go to Nevada to buy my diesel and do all kinds of trickery until it had 7500 miles on it. Luckily I already had a relationship with a dealer in Reno, but I shouldn't have had to do that. Can't wait to move to Nevada.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @sk00chy
        Doesn't Nevada have the highest unemployment in the nation? Or was it the greatest number of Home Foreclosures?
          sk00chy
          • 3 Years Ago
          Both, which makes it very cheap to live there. Assuming you have job security.
        Marcopolo
        • 3 Years Ago
        @sk00chy
        Wouldn't that be abit of a gamble?
          Marcopolo
          • 19 Hours Ago
          @Marcopolo
          Sorry, this post was meant to be a reply to Sk00chy wanting to move to Nevada.
        Dave R
        • 3 Years Ago
        @sk00chy
        Considering that even with all the CA pollution regs, CA still has many cities at the bottom of the list for air quality (Google "california air quality" for the recent report)... Screw YOU for bringing your dirty diesel vehicle to CA. Can't wait until you move to Nevada.
          • 19 Hours Ago
          @Dave R
          How do you know he's not using biodiesel? You apparently don't know much about diesel vehicles... and how even without biodiesel, recent ones don't contribute to California's smog as much as a gasoline engine. It's your incorrect beliefs about diesels that make them difficult to get in the US. In terms of tailpipe emissions, particulate matter is now controlled by filters on the exhaust of passenger vehicles (California is investigating placing these on commercial vehicles as well). NOx is controlled by urea injection these days. Diesel produces less long-term greenhouse gases. And for non-tailpipe emissions, no evap controls are required on diesels because the fuel doesn't contribute to that kind of pollution. Diesel's pollution is mostly particulate, not air pollution. Maybe you should learn to use that "Google" thing you like to throw out there, so screw YOUR incorrect assumptions! I also wish we could get those diesels we missed out on here in California, too, like the Jeeps.
    • Load More Comments