Additionally, it could point to active malfeasance if they start to selectively not rollout in CA. I don't think it would be too hard for a lawyer to pick apar

Additionally, it could point to active malfeasance if they start to selectively not rollout in CA. I don't think it would be too hard for a lawyer to pick apart any argument that the rules are that onerous that they can't upgrade in one populated state/city compared to another in another state. If anything it would make it easier to prove they're being disingenuous about upgrades I would think.