Nebraska & 16 Other States Sue California Over Zero-Emissions Trucking Mandates

In a lawsuit filed on Monday, Nebraska and 16 other states sued the State of California over their “Advanced Clean Fleet” electric vehicle (EV) truck mandates, including laws where only new zero-emissions trucks would be sold in California beginning in 2035 and where only zero emissions trucks would be on California roads by the 2040s.

The lawsuit dates back to last year, when the California Air Resources Board (CARB) began enacting clean fleet regulations. In 2023 CARB announced that the sale of all new diesel big rig trucks and buses will be banned in the state of California starting in 2036, similar to the state’s new gas-powered car sale ban that is currently set for 2035. In addition to the 2036 sales ban on new diesel trucks and buses, CARB also announced that all trucks in California must be zero-emissions by 2042. Under these new regulations, also known as the Advanced Clean Fleets rule, CARB aimed to achieve a total zero-emissions truck and bus fleet by 2045, as well as have at least 1.6 million zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty trucks operating in the state by 2048.

These new rules were met with heavy opposition. In October, the California Trucking Association (CTA) sued the state over the Advanced Clean Fleet rules. However, the suit did little to halt the advancing laws. That’s when other states began to grow upset. As some of the deadlines, including the 2027 deadline where all medium- and heavy-duty vehicles acquired by state and local governments must be emissions free, come into view, states found that California could have more power over national usage. As 30% of all U.S. vehicle imports come through California ports, California’s electric trucking mandates essentially mean that they are for the entire country as well.

This led to the Nebraska led lawsuit announcement Monday, with 16 other states backing Nebraska up. The suit, filed in the Eastern District of California, charges both CARB Executive Officer Dr. Steven Cliff and California Attorney General Rob Bonta that the Advanced Clean Fleet regulations would go over federal law, disrupt supply chains across the country, not be able to handle higher payload capacities, and would harm all states that didn’t have such mandates since so many trucking routes were California based.

In addition to the California suit, Nebraska and 23 other states also sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over a new rule passed in March which directs that 30% of heavy duty trucks in the U.S. have to be electric by 2032.

“If the electric vehicle trucking mandates aren’t stopped, Nebraskans will pay the price,” said Nebraska Attorney General Mike Hilgers on Monday. “About 30% of U.S. imports arrive in California. This rule will be far too costly for consumers. These things don’t have the same kind of range; they can’t take the same kind of payload capacity. We know that those costs would flow through to customers. It would have a devastating impact on Nebraska businesses and Nebraska customers.

“California and an unaccountable EPA are trying to transform our national trucking industry and supply chain infrastructure. This effort—coming at a time of heightened inflation and with an already-strained electrical grid—will devastate the trucking and logistics industry, raise prices for customers, and impact untold number of jobs across Nebraska and the country. Neither California nor the EPA has the constitutional power to dictate these nationwide rules to Americans.”

“We feed the world, we save the planet,” Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen said. “The ports up and down California — you’re going to tell us we can’t get our product to the ports? It’s beyond comprehension.”

17 states challenge California

The 17 states in the suit, State of Nebraska v. Cliff, also zeroed in on the Advanced Clean Fleets regulations in the suit, pointing out that the regulations “Masquerade as a rule for in-state conduct. But by leveraging California’s large population and access to international ports on the West Coast, Advanced Clean Fleets exports its in-state ban nationwide, creating harms which are certain to reach Plaintiffs’ States.”

“The regulations will force trucks to retire their internal combustion-powered engines because California will not allow them on the state’s roads. With California’s international ports being a hub for much of the nation’s imports, they could disrupt the supply chain, slow transport of goods, and raise prices. While California can regulate emissions, they cannot regulate the emissions of vehicles moving from state-to-state without the approval of Congress under the Congressional Commerce Clause.”

To stop the Californian policies from influencing nationwide regulations and commerce, the 17 states want the implementation of California’s Advanced Clean Fleets regulations to be halted. In addition, they also want an injunction so that California cannot have any of the regulations enforceable during the trial.

As of Tuesday, neither Bonta or Cliff have yet to comment on the Nebraska suit. However, trucking and legal experts have said that the Nebraska suit will likely have a real chance of moving forward, which is currently leaving many Californian lawmakers and environmental advocates on edge.

“The Nebraska lawsuit makes a lot of excellent points,” explained Simon Bernard, a trucking advocate who works with many trucking and shipping companies on logistics and fleet issues, to the Globe on Tuesday. “A lot of similar lawsuits in the past didn’t tie in commerce so much or what the effects of having so many vehicles come through California really are.”

“This, as well as the EPA lawsuit, also shows just how not ready most states are when it comes to electric vehicles and how unsatisfied many are with the current limits of large electric trucks. They hold a lot less, the range is greatly reduced, and the battery charging times are much higher. Short haul, especially with small trucks, it could work. But, as the suit points out, this is connected to something mass scale and the readiness is not even close.”

“And this could backfire now too, with California’s regulations now being on the line. It will be interesting to hear what CARB and Bonta will say, because, until Monday, they only ever had some state groups challenge this, not a coalition of states taking on them and the EPA.”

Attorney General Bonta and the California Air Resources Board are expected to make statements on the lawsuit soon.