HJRES-202-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsored by Harriet Hageman (R-WY)
What it does
This joint resolution would use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to nullify an EPA decision from 2009 that granted California a waiver from federal Clean Air Act preemption, allowing California to enforce its own greenhouse gas emission standards for new motor vehicles starting with model year 2009. If enacted, the waiver would have no force or effect, meaning California could no longer enforce those standards under that waiver. Other states that adopted California's standards under Section 177 of the Clean Air Act could also be affected.
Who benefits
Automakers that sell vehicles nationally and prefer a single federal standard over complying with California's stricter rules. Consumers in non-California states who may see lower vehicle prices if manufacturers no longer need to produce California-compliant fleets. States that have not adopted California standards and prefer uniform federal rules. Fossil fuel industry stakeholders who benefit from less stringent vehicle emissions requirements.
Who is hurt
California residents and the roughly 17 other states that have adopted California's vehicle standards, who could lose the stricter emissions protections those standards provide. Environmental and public health advocates who argue tighter vehicle emissions reduce smog and particulate matter. Electric vehicle manufacturers and suppliers who have benefited from California's standards driving EV adoption. Future vehicle buyers in California-standard states who may face less fuel-efficient or higher-emitting vehicle options.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that allowing a single state to effectively set national vehicle standards — since automakers often build to California's specs for the whole country — undermines the constitutional principle of uniform federal commerce regulation. They contend that the 2009 waiver was granted for greenhouse gas standards that go beyond California's original air quality mandate, and that Congress, not the EPA, should decide whether one state can drive national automotive policy affecting hundreds of millions of consumers and a multi-trillion-dollar industry.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that California's authority to set stricter vehicle emissions standards is explicitly preserved by Section 209 of the Clean Air Act, and that the state has exercised this authority continuously since before the federal program existed. They contend that revoking the waiver via the CRA is procedurally questionable — the 2009 rule is well outside the CRA's standard 60-day review window — and that eliminating California's standards would worsen air quality in states home to tens of millions of people who have relied on those protections for decades.
Constitutional context
The Clean Air Act's California waiver provision rests on Congress's Commerce Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 3). Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts will independently assess whether the EPA's 2009 waiver decision was within its statutory authority rather than deferring to the agency's interpretation. The major questions doctrine from West Virginia v. EPA (2022) is also relevant: if the waiver effectively allows one state to set de facto national vehicle standards of vast economic significance, courts may scrutinize whether Congress clearly authorized that outcome.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain authority to nullify an executive agency (EPA) waiver decision; the check on this power is the presidential veto and, if enacted, potential judicial review of whether the CRA can be applied to a rule issued well outside the standard review window.
Historical precedent
Congress has not previously used the CRA to revoke a California Clean Air Act waiver; however, the EPA itself revoked this same 2009 waiver during the first Trump administration in 2019, a decision that was subsequently reinstated by the Biden administration in 2022, making the underlying waiver the subject of ongoing executive and legal dispute.