California Sues Trump EPA Over Review Of State Emissions Waivers
On Monday, June 22, 2026, California sued the Environmental Protection Agency in federal court, challenging the agency's decision to send four state vehicle-emissions waivers to Congress under the Congressional Review Act.[1]
The complaint says the waivers cover vehicle emissions and lawn-and-garden equipment and were long treated as Clean Air Act waiver orders, not as regulations subject to CRA review.[1] California argues EPA cannot retroactively convert waiver decisions into rules without a public process, and it asked the court to block the agency's action as unlawful.[1]
In February 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said the agency would transmit three Biden-era California waivers to Congress. President Trump signed three Congressional Review Act resolutions of disapproval in June 2025 that repealed those waivers. On June 12, 2026, EPA transmitted four additional older waivers that it said had to be submitted, prompting California's latest legal challenge.
The lawsuit could reshape how California wins and defends waiver authority and how Congress can overturn such policies.[1] Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have adopted some California vehicle standards, giving California outsized leverage with automakers. Those jurisdictions together accounted for more than 40% of new U.S. light-duty vehicle registrations and 25% of new heavy-duty registrations in 2023. Since 1967, EPA has granted more than 100 waivers or authorizations for vehicle and engine standards.
The mainstream summary does not mention that this lawsuit represents the 72nd legal challenge California has filed against the Trump administration, highlighting a pattern of aggressive legal tactics employed by the state. Notably, California Attorney General Rob Bonta boasts an 80% success rate in previous cases, which underscores the potential implications of this lawsuit for future environmental regulatory battles. Additionally, while the summary frames the EPA's actions as a straightforward regulatory shift, the underlying legal argument presented by California emphasizes that the EPA's reclassification of longstanding waivers as rules subject to Congressional oversight is fundamentally unlawful, a nuance that could have significant ramifications for state-federal relations in environmental policy.
Moreover, the summary overlooks the historical context provided by the Congressional Research Service, which notes that since 1967, the EPA has granted California over 100 waivers under the Clean Air Act, traditionally treated as adjudicatory orders rather than regulations. This reclassification by the Trump administration represents a significant shift in federal priorities, aiming to diminish state influence over national auto markets and prioritize consumer choice. Such details are crucial for understanding the broader implications of this legal challenge and the evolving landscape of environmental regulation in the U.S.[2]
Show source details & analysis (1 source)
📊 Relevant Data
Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have adopted at least some of California's vehicle emissions standards under Clean Air Act Section 177; California and these states together accounted for more than 40% of new U.S. light-duty vehicle registrations and 25% of new heavy-duty vehicle registrations in 2023.
California and the Clean Air Act (CAA) Waiver — Congressional Research Service
Since 1967, EPA has granted California more than 100 waivers or authorizations under Clean Air Act Sections 209(b) and 209(e) for vehicle and engine emissions standards.
California and the Clean Air Act (CAA) Waiver — Congressional Research Service
📌 Key Facts
- On Monday, June 22, 2026, California filed suit against EPA over its decision to submit four California emissions waivers to Congress under the Congressional Review Act.
- The waivers cover vehicle emissions and lawn and garden equipment and historically have been treated as Clean Air Act waiver orders, not CRA-reviewable regulations.
- The lawsuit argues EPA cannot retroactively transform waiver adjudications into rules without a public process, and the outcome could reshape both California’s waiver authority and Congress’s ability to overturn such policies.
📰 Source Timeline (1)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time