States rights, my orange butt - EPA to revoke CA emissions exemption

[Acer]

Trump to revoke California's exemption to set its own emissions standards.

I wonder what wisdom the 5-4 SCOTUS will scry in the federalist papers to prop up this one.

[cbelt3]

Waste of time. Automakers are on a long design cycle for emissions, and this won't change a thing. Except for VW.. they can just change some code...:devil:

[pdq]

What would happen if a President issued an edict-by-tweet and nobody listened?

California spurned the White House by secretly negotiating a deal with four major automakers. As part of the pact, the car manufacturers — Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and BMW — agreed to voluntarily abide by California’s rules and increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, essentially ignoring the Trump administration’s plans to roll back tailpipe pollution standards...

Other automakers, such as General Motors, have reportedly been interested in joining the agreement.

miley-laughing001:

[rjmacs]

This is a hugely important case.

[GGD]

I wonder if he decided to announce this today while he was actually in CA. At an undisclosed location.

https://padailypost.com/2019/09/17/trump...ere-today/

President Trump is scheduled to arrive on Air Force One at Moffett Field at 11 a.m. today (Sept. 17) and then he will travel to an undisclosed location for a fund-raising luncheon.

Not even the donors who bought tickets ranging up to $100,000 know where it will take place. Instead, they’ve been told to go to places where shuttles will take them to the luncheon.

[deckeda]

GGD wrote:
I wonder if he decided to announce this today while he was actually in CA. At an undisclosed location.

https://padailypost.com/2019/09/17/trump...ere-today/

President Trump is scheduled to arrive on Air Force One at Moffett Field at 11 a.m. today (Sept. 17) and then he will travel to an undisclosed location for a fund-raising luncheon.

Not even the donors who bought tickets ranging up to $100,000 know where it will take place. Instead, they’ve been told to go to places where shuttles will take them to the luncheon.

OK that’s dystopian and (I don’t know, worse in some way).

[deckeda]

pdq wrote:
What would happen if a President issued an edict-by-tweet and nobody listened?

California spurned the White House by secretly negotiating a deal with four major automakers. As part of the pact, the car manufacturers — Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and BMW — agreed to voluntarily abide by California’s rules and increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, essentially ignoring the Trump administration’s plans to roll back tailpipe pollution standards...

Other automakers, such as General Motors, have reportedly been interested in joining the agreement.

miley-laughing001:

Yep, we’ve reached the point where the EPA can effectively cease to exist and manufacturers and states will make relevant, cognizant, safer decisions that dovetail with profits. Such is the embarrassment and disgrace of yet another Department under Trump control. Bottom line: the EPA can roll back whatever they want but it won’t change what manufacturers progressively do. (Even if it’s ironic ... )

[Sarcany]

The law (Clean Air Act) as written requires the EPA to grant California a waiver.

So, what's the EPA's basis for their new rule? Rules can only be made in accordance with the corresponding enabling law and under the authority of that law.

[RgrF]

Sarcany wrote:
The law (Clean Air Act) as written requires the EPA to grant California a waiver.

So, what's the EPA's basis for their new rule? Rules can only be made in accordance with the corresponding enabling law and under the authority of that law.

Under what circumstance and when did this administration begin following the law? They (political appointees) tend to think ruling by fiat is the natural order of things, just like when they ran their respective business'.

[cbelt3]

Sarcany wrote:
The law (Clean Air Act) as written requires the EPA to grant California a waiver.

So, what's the EPA's basis for their new rule? Rules can only be made in accordance with the corresponding enabling law and under the authority of that law.

Oh.... innocence....
“Rules “ involve the executive branch interpretation of the law. For example “you can’t indict a sitting president” is one such interpretation.

And “I’m not answering anything “ is not obstruction.

Etc. etc etc.

2021 will see, hopefully, a lot of this crap thrown away, and it’s architects thrown in jail.