Global Warming Lawsuits

What's New 

On April 2, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision ruling that the Clean Air Act gives the U.S. EPA the authority to regulate global warming pollution from cars.  The ruling will have major implications for California’s Clean Cars program (AB 1493).  Auto manufactuers have been fighting the program – which is set to reduce global warming pollution from new cars 25 percent in 2009 – in court, but the Supreme Court's ruling strengthens California’s effort to put cleaner cars on the road.

Brief Summary

There are currently two high-profile lawsuits that could have a tremendous impact on global warming policies affecting California.

Central Valley Chrysler-Jeep Inc., v. California Air Resources Board

Since its inception, section 209 of the federal Clean Air Act has authorized California to set its own emission standards for new cars sold in California. Acting under that authority, California has led the nation for nearly 40 years in the development of technologies to reduce motor vehicle air pollution.  In 2002, California enacted a state law – AB 1493 – that instructed the California Air Resources Board to adopt regulations “that achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.”  In 2004, the Air Board finalized standards to reduce motor vehicle emissions of four air pollutants that contribute to global warming.

In response, the automobile industry sued California, alleging that the standards violated federal laws and policies.  The automobile industry’s two main claims are: a) that federal fuel economy standards preempt the California clean car standards, and b) irregardless, California’s clean car standards don’t meet the various requirements that section 209 places on California in adopting its own vehicle emissions standards.

This case is being heard before the United States District Court in Fresno. 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al., v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.

In 1999, a set of petitioners asked U.S. EPA to set standards for greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles under section 202 of the Clean Air Act, which authorizes automobile emissions standards for “air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.”  In 2003, EPA denied the petition, arguing that it did not have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases and that, as a back-up rationale, it would not regulate them even if it did have the authority.

In response, Massachusetts, twelve other states (including California), several cities, and numerous environmental groups challenged EPA’s denial of the petition. The petitioners maintain that greenhouse gases are indeed “air pollutants” as defined by the Act.  Furthermore, EPA does not have free discretion in deciding whether to regulate air pollutants from automobiles; under section 202, they must issue emissions standards for motor vehicles if the air pollutants “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” 

On April 2, the Court issued a landmark ruling.  Key points from the ruling include:

• The Clean Air Act gives the U.S. EPA the authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas pollutants from motor vehicles;

• Even though the Department of Transportation (DOT) has the sole responsibility to set automobile fuel economy standards, that responsibility does “in no way licenses EPA to shirk its environmental responsibilities.”  In other words, U.S. EPA has the obligation to create regulations to protect the public from global warming even if those regulations overlap with fuel economy standards; and 

• U.S. EPA has limited discretion in determining whether or not to exercise their authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles.