>Something like claiming that this was outside the scope of the authority granted to the EPA by Congress But that's the thing: it's not. The waiver process is

>Something like claiming that this was outside the scope of the authority granted to the EPA by Congress But that's the thing: it's not. The waiver process is an explicit, black and white textual part of the Clean Air Act [0] including a part explicitly about California [1]. Like, there's no meat on dem legal bones. FWIW beyond the text there's a bunch of other legal principles and goals/impulses that may end up in conflict. Reliance is going to be a significant issue, cars are not quick design/turnaround products. Everyone who has invested a lot based on the normal legal process is going to be unhappy if the rug gets yanked out from under them and that is legally relevant. As far as goals/impulses, a lot of what Trump Admin/Project 2025/DOGE wants to do involves wholesale dismantling of Federal regulation, departments and standards. But the thing is (as ISPs have been discovering to their chagrin in SCOTUS after their dog-catching-car moment [2]), it's the regulation that means federal supremacy even comes into play at all. If that goes away then authority reverts back to the states to all do whatever they want piecemeal. And at the court level state power itself is a big strain of thought in the last few decades of conservative appointees. I have no doubt there will be efforts to have their cake and eat it too, but I don't think we're yet so far gone that they'll be able to just rule by fiat, at least not in "the next few months". ---- 0: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7543 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7543 1: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7507 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7507 2: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/12/big-loss-for-isps-as-supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-15-broadband-law/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/12/big-loss-for-isp...