SJRES-205-119
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Sponsored by Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
What it does
This joint resolution would use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to nullify an EPA decision published January 6, 2025 (90 Fed. Reg. 640) that granted California a waiver to enforce its own stricter emission standards for small off-road engines — such as those used in lawn mowers, generators, and similar equipment. If enacted, the EPA's waiver decision would have no force or effect, meaning California could not enforce its standards under that federal authorization. The CRA also bars the EPA from issuing a "substantially similar" rule in the future without new congressional authorization.
Who benefits
Manufacturers of small off-road engines and gasoline-powered outdoor power equipment (e.g., lawn mowers, leaf blowers, generators, pressure washers) who would avoid having to produce California-specific compliant models. Retailers selling this equipment in California and other states that follow California's standards. Consumers in California and "CARB states" who might otherwise face higher equipment prices or reduced product availability. Small landscaping and lawn care businesses that rely on gasoline-powered equipment and could face higher replacement costs under the California rules.
Who is hurt
California residents and communities in areas with poor air quality who would lose the additional emission reductions the state's stricter standards were designed to deliver. The roughly 17 states that have adopted California's emission standards under Clean Air Act Section 177, which would also lose the benefit of the waiver. Environmental and public health advocacy organizations whose policy goals depend on state-level emission leadership. California state government, which loses a tool it has used for decades to address local air quality problems. Manufacturers who have already invested in California-compliant product lines.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that California's small off-road engine rules — which effectively ban the sale of new gasoline-powered lawn equipment — impose a de facto national standard, since manufacturers often cannot economically maintain separate product lines for California and the rest of the country. They contend this allows a single state to dictate product availability for all American consumers and businesses without congressional authorization, undermining the federal regulatory framework. They further argue that small off-road engines contribute a relatively minor share of total air pollution, making the economic disruption to equipment manufacturers and consumers disproportionate to any air quality benefit.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that California's authority to set stricter vehicle and engine emission standards is explicitly granted by Congress under Section 209(e) of the Clean Air Act, and that the EPA waiver process is the established, lawful mechanism for exercising that authority — one California has used successfully for over 50 years. They contend that blocking this waiver through the CRA sets a precedent that could unravel California's broader emission waiver program, which has driven national improvements in air quality, and that the 17 states following California's standards represent roughly one-third of the U.S. population with a legitimate interest in cleaner air.
Constitutional context
The Clean Air Act's California waiver provision (Section 209) is grounded in Congress's Commerce Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 3). Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts would independently review whether the EPA's waiver decision was consistent with the statute, without deferring to the agency's interpretation. The major questions doctrine from West Virginia v. EPA (2022) could also be relevant if opponents argue the original EPA waiver decision represented a sweeping policy choice requiring clearer congressional authorization.
Checks and balances
Congress gains authority to nullify the EPA's waiver decision; the CRA's "substantially similar" bar limits future executive action without new legislation; California retains the ability to lobby Congress or pursue separate legal challenges, but loses its administrative pathway under the existing waiver.
Historical precedent
Congress used the Congressional Review Act in 2018 (S.J. Res. 23) to attempt to block a prior California waiver for heavy-duty truck emissions, though that effort did not advance; the CRA has not previously been successfully used to nullify a California Clean Air Act waiver.