Ohio v. EPA

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied petitions for review challenging the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) 2022 reinstatement of the 2013 waiver under the Clean Air Act of federal preemption for California’s Advanced Clean Car Program regulations. The California regulations included greenhouse gas emissions requirements for automobiles for Model Years 2017 to 2025 and a requirement that around 15% of manufacturers’ fleets be zero-emissions vehicles by Model Year 2025. The D.C. Circuit found that neither state petitioners nor fuel petitioners (entities and trade associations involved in the production or sale of liquid fuels) had standing for statutory claims because they failed to allege that a favorable decision would redress their alleged economic injuries. The court said there was no basis to conclude that third-party automobile manufacturers “would, in fact, change course with respect to the relevant model years” if the court vacated the waiver. The D.C. Circuit therefore did not consider the merits of the fuel petitioners’ argument that California’s regulations did not meet the Clean Air Act’s criteria for a waiver of preemption or the merits of the state petitioners’ argument that the waiver was contrary to the Energy Policy and Conservation Act’s preemption of state fuel economy standards. The D.C. Circuit found that the state petitioners did have standing for their constitutional claim that the waiver provision of the Clean Air Act violated the “equal sovereignty principle.” The court, however, rejected this claim on the merits, concluding that the principle did not extend to laws enacted under Congress’s Commerce Clause power.

The D.C. Circuit issued an order regarding the format of September 15, 2023 oral arguments in challenges to EPA’s reinstatement of the waiver allowing California to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The order specified that oral arguments would feature counsel for private petitioners, state petitioners, EPA, and California and focus on standing and zone of interests, Clean Air Act authority and reconsideration authority, equal sovereignty, and Energy Policy and Conservation Act issues.

Four petitions for review were filed in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging EPA’s action reinstating the waiver allowing California to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. The petitions were filed by (1) 17 states led by Ohio; (2) the Soybean Associations for the States of Iowa, Minnesota, and South Dakota, and Diamond Alternative Energy, LLC, a subsidiary of Valero Energy Corporation; (3) American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, Domestic Energy Producers Alliance, Energy Marketers of America, and National Association of Convenience Stores; and (4) Clean Fuels Development Coalition and six other petitioners that described themselves as “part of the renewable fuel industry and … specifically focused on the production and sale of corn ethanol.” Twenty states, the District of Columbia, Los Angeles, and New York City moved to intervene in support of EPA, as did 10 nongovernmental organizations that identified themselves as “public interest organizations.”