Environmental Defense Fund v. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

The day after Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) filed a second petition for review along with other groups, EDF sought voluntary dismissal without prejudice of its original petition.

Seven states, a trade association representing automobile manufacturers, and an umbrella organization representing certain automobile manufacturers and trade groups filed motions to intervene in support of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in a proceeding filed in the D.C. Circuit to challenge NHTSA’s final rule withdrawing California’s waiver for its greenhouse gas and zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) program and preempting state programs that regulate vehicle greenhouse gas emissions or create ZEV mandates. The automaker groups argued that they should be allowed to intervene as of right because they represent a substantial portion of the regulated industry and have an interest in a single national regulatory program.

The seven states—Ohio, Alabama, Alaska, Louisiana, Texas, Utah, and West Virginia—sought to intervene “both because California’s standards elevate California’s sovereignty above other States and because those standards shape the market for the regulated vehicles nationwide.”

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) filed a protective petition for review in the D.C. Circuit in September to protect its right to judicial review in the event that the federal district court in which EDF and others have filed lawsuits challenging the final rule determines that the district court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.