Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA (2010)
In 2010, industry actors challenged a rulemaking by EPA and NHTSA establishing light duty motor vehicle emissions standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards (known as the “tailpipe rule”). The litigation was an attempt to reduce the average fuel economy requirements placed on motor vehicle manufacturers. EPA estimated that the benefits of the reduction in emissions and fuel savings would top $240 billion.
Multiple states intervened to support EPA and the standards. In their motion to intervene, they explained that they had a special interest in this topic because the CAFE standards were the “most significant” federal action to date to address global warming, which was harming the states and their citizens. The case was eventually consolidated with many other lawsuits challenging the motor vehicle emission standards and related rulemakings (including the endangerment finding rule, the tailpipe rule, the tailoring rule, and the timing rule). The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately upheld all of these standards, including the tailpipe rule. More information about the consolidated cases >>
- Intervention Motion
- Brief for State and Environmental Intervenors in Support of Respondents
- D.C. Circuit Decision