- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Washington
- /
- Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation
Litigation
Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
07/23/2025
Decision
Motion to intervene granted.
The federal district court for the Western District of Washington allowed Sierra Club and six other organizations to intervene on behalf of the plaintiff states challenging the suspension or revocation of federal approvals of State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plans and the withholding or withdrawing of National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program funds. The court found that four of the organizations could intervene as of right but that all seven organizations qualified for permissive intervention. The court said the organizations had shown that they would bring “a unique perspective and expertise” that would not necessarily duplicate the plaintiff states’ role.
06/24/2025
Decision
Motion for preliminary injunction granted in part and denied in part.
The federal district court for the Western District of Washington granted in part and denied in part 16 states’ motion for a preliminary injunction in their lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Transportation and Federal Highway Administration’s actions to suspend or terminate funding under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act’s (IIJA’s) National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program for electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure. As threshold matters, the court found that the states’ claims were ripe and that the defendants’ action was reviewable final agency action under the Administrative Procedural Act. The court then found that the states were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that the defendants’ actions exceeded their authority under IIJA, that their action was likely arbitrary and capricious, not in accordance with law and performed without observance of required procedure, and in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. In addition, the court found that the states demonstrated harms to their EV infrastructure programs and administrative burdens that were not purely economic. The court also found that the balance of equities and public interest favored the states. The court granted the preliminary injunction motion as to all but three of the plaintiffs (Vermont, Minnesota, and the District of Columbia), finding that those plaintiffs had not established irreparable harm such as a delayed or canceled project. The court declined to impose a bond and stayed the injunction until July 1.
05/28/2025
Opposition
Opposition filed by defendants to plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction.
–
05/22/2025
Motion To Intervene
Proposed complaint-in-intervention filed by public interest organizations.
–
05/07/2025
Complaint
Complaint filed.
On May 7, 2025, Washington, 15 other states, and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit alleging that the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the heads of those agencies acted unlawfully by categorically suspending or revoking State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plan approvals and withholding or withdrawing National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program funds from the states. The NEVI Formula Program was established by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which appropriated $5 billion for funding to the states “to strategically deploy electric vehicle charging infrastructure and to establish an interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability.” In Executive Order 14,143, “Unleashing American Energy,” President Trump directed federal agencies to pause the NEVI Formula Program funding. The plaintiff states alleged that the FHWA “almost immediately carried out President Trump’s anti-NEVI directive in diametric opposition to statutory mandate.” The states alleged that they each had invested in programs to encourage adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other pollution from combustion engine vehicles and that the defendants’ actions directly harmed the states’ interests, including through financial and environmental harms. They asserted that the defendants violated the Administrative Procedure Act, separation of powers, and the Take Care Clause, and that the defendants’ actions were ultra vires. They requested declaratory and injunctive relief, including injunctions enjoining the defendants from withholding or withdrawing NEVI Formula Program funds in contravention of IIJA’s express mandates.
Summary
States' lawsuit challenging the suspension or revocation of federal approvals of State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plans and the withholding or withdrawing of National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program funds.