In 2020, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced his Executive Order (EO) N-79-20, banning the sale of new gas-powered vehicles in 2035. According to the plan, fossil-fuel-powered vehicles would be phased off in the state, reducing emissions and pushing major retailers to start producing non-gas-powered vehicles.
Under the new Trump administration, Republican leadership has tried to block Gov. Newsom’s executive order. If Trump and his allies succeed in blocking California’s 2035 gas car ban, it will set a dangerous precedent for the future of addressing climate change in the United States (U.S.) and states’ authority over protecting the environment.
California is a big and populous state that contributes significantly to air pollution. Cars and trucks account for almost 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Cities like Los Angeles experience record-breaking pollution levels, which increase the threat of wildfires and heatwaves. With such significant consequences and dangers, something needed to change. The 2035 ban addresses this problem by enforcing plans to reduce emissions, shift to cleaner energy and become carbon neutral by 2045.
President Trump and congressional Republicans have tried to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke California’s waiver, stripping the state of its power to set its own emissions standards. If they succeed, the 2035 gas car ban and other progressive climate policies would be blocked. However, this action is completely unconstitutional as it violates the Tenth Amendment, which grants states the power to regulate matters not expressly covered by the federal government — including the environment and climate.
California has a special waiver under the Clean Air Act, which allows the state to set stricter vehicle emission standards than the federal government. This waiver has been in place for decades and has been the key to California’s ability to act as a global leader in environmental policies. Since other states and countries often follow California’s example for climate policy, the impacts of Republicans dismantling California’s authority over climate policy would have significant effects beyond the state’s borders. If California loses this power to set policy precedents, it will hurt the nation’s ability to tackle climate change.
California has relied on the Clean Air Act for more than 50 years, and the legal precedent supports its right to maintain this authority. Revoking it would be a dangerous step backward for states’ rights — potentially opening the door for the federal government to override state-level policies on a wide range of issues. Thus, this isn’t just about California; it’s about whether states have the right to retain the authority granted by the Clean Air Act and the Tenth Amendment to safeguard their environments and public health.
The broader effects of removing California’s authority over climate policy would also mean a rollback of state-level environmental policies across the country, including clean energy sources, plastic bag bans and lowering carbon emissions. Other states may hesitate to push forward with progressive environmental laws, fearing federal intervention if California does not lead by example. A national climate policy would lead to a one-size-fits-all approach, which doesn’t address the specific challenges faced by different states. Overall, this would hurt the country’s effort to address climate change.
To the Trump administration and the Republican Party, constitutional violations seem to be of no concern — particularly with the 14th Amendment. The administration has already violated Section 3 of the 14th Amendment by allowing Trump to run for office, despite the clear language that states anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” against the U.S. should be disqualified. Additionally, the Trump administration’s rollback of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) policies violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, which guarantees equal protection under the law for all people.
Trump has also disregarded the 14th Amendment in his treatment of immigrants, specifically with his actions against birthright citizenship, undermining the principle that anyone born in the U.S. is entitled to citizenship. The disregard for these rights and protections shows a troubling pattern of violating the Constitution when it serves his political agenda, which is clearly reflected in the administration’s approach to climate change.
However, critics of California’s approach to climate policy argue that allowing the state to set its own emissions standards creates a confusing patchwork of regulations that make it harder for automakers to comply. They also argue that banning gas-powered cars by 2035 is unrealistic, especially considering concerns about infrastructure and consumer adoption. But, these arguments overlook the fact that the auto industry is already shifting toward electric vehicles. Automakers like Tesla and Ford are making huge investments in electric vehicles because that’s where the future of the industry is headed. California’s policies have often driven this innovation in the auto industry, pushing companies to develop cleaner and more efficient vehicles. The state should continue to drive this innovation.
The Trump administration’s climate change policies have been extremely regressive since his first term as he withdrew from the Paris Agreement and implemented policies that weakened emissions standards. Meanwhile, California has been a leader in pushing for cleaner air, greener energy and stronger climate policies. California and other states should be able to continue doing this and lead the way in the fight against the climate crisis.
