When the Trump administration vowed earlier this year to claw back funds that had previously been awarded for the construction of new electric vehicle charging infrastructure, a California representative slammed the move as “unconstitutional.” On Tuesday, a U.S. district judge in Washington State stopped short of agreeing, but found merit in the plaintiffs’ argument in a suit filed by California, 15 other states and the District of Columbia, that the administration acted illegally. Judge Tana Lin said it was likely that the states will ultimately win, giving the admin a week to re-open its coffers—or, more likely, to appeal the ruling, which may be destined for the Supreme Court, Reuters reports.
The sixteen states who sued the administration claimed that the administration’s move to cut funding would result in immediate financial harm, citing the money already spent on their contributions to the infrastructure projects for which they’d received federal funding approval. Judge Tin carved out exceptions for two of them (Minnesota and Vermont) in her ruling, along with the District of Columbia, as they failed to demonstrate how they’d been monetarily impacted by the administration’s actions.
President Trump began targeting Biden-era EV mandates almost immediately after taking office again. His administration is attempting to roll back the expansion of charging infrastructure, federal incentives for private EV purchases, and the federal government’s expansion of its own electrified fleet. Judge Tin’s ruling is the latest in a series of setbacks for the administration, which is facing both legal and legislative hurdles to its initiatives.
During his first term, Trump’s administration pushed hard to not only roll back federal emissions standards, but to weaken the power of individual states to set their own limits on internal-combustion engines. The administration’s campaign against California and its coalition of blue-leaning “CARB states” seemed decisive at first, but all of its early victories were ultimately for naught, as the Supreme Court ultimately sided with the states over the federal government. It’s a battle Trump has pledged to take up again in his second term, but it’s unclear what avenue the admin will be able to pursue that wasn’t explored previously; anything setting a permanent framework would likely have to be approved by Congress, where the Republican majority is slim.
Got a tip? Send it our way at tips@thedrive.com.
Byron is a contributing writer and auto reviewer with a keen eye for infrastructure, sales and regulatory stories.