• About
    • Which Energy Mix is this?
  • Climate News Network Archive
  • Contact
The climate news that makes a difference.
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
SUBSCRIBE
DONATE
No Result
View All Result
The Energy Mix
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities
  FEATURED
Wind and Solar Cheaper than Gas Plants in Ontario and Alberta, Study Shows February 7, 2023
AI Predicts World Over 1.5°C Limit by 2030, Undercuts Climate Progress Reports February 7, 2023
February Brings Record Cold, Widespread Power Outages to Much of North America February 7, 2023
Solar Geoengineering Banned in Mexico After ‘Rogue’ Stunt February 7, 2023
Lithium Mine Divides Nemaska Cree Over Impacts, Benefits February 7, 2023
Next
Prev

‘Cruel Parody of Anti-Trust Enforcement’ as Trump Justice Department Probes Automakers’ Emissions Deal with California

September 8, 2019
Reading time: 4 minutes

Minesweeper/Wikimedia Commons

Minesweeper/Wikimedia Commons

24
SHARES
 

In what a New York Times editorial calls a “cruel parody of anti-trust enforcement”, the U.S. Justice Department has launched an investigation after four major automakers embarrassed Donald Trump by striking a deal with California to boost their vehicles’ fuel efficiency and reduce their tailpipe emissions.

After Ford, Volkswagen, Honda, and BMW announced the deal in July, Trump denounced it as a “P.R. stunt”. Then in a tweet in late August, he “criticized the ‘politically correct Automobile Companies’, arguing his proposal would lower car costs and have ‘very little impact on the environment’,” The Guardian reported at the time.

  • The climate news you need. Subscribe now to our engaging new weekly digest.
  • You’ll receive exclusive, never-before-seen-content, distilled and delivered to your inbox every weekend.
  • The Weekender: Succinct, solutions-focused, and designed with the discerning reader in mind.
Subscribe

“Now, the Justice Department is investigating whether the four automakers violated federal antitrust laws by reaching a deal with California, on the grounds that the agreement could potentially limit consumer choice,” the Times says, citing “people familiar with the matter” who spoke to the Wall Street Journal. “The investigation comes amid a battle over the Trump administration’s effort to drastically roll back Obama-era rules intended to reduce emissions from cars and light trucks that contribute to global warming, a rollback that major automakers have publicly opposed.”

The White House is also considering measures to rescind California’s hard-won right to set its own, stricter fuel efficiency standard. California and 18 other states have vowed to protect that authority in court.

“In a clear signal that the administration intends to increase the pressure on California, top lawyers from the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department on Friday sent a letter of rebuke to Mary D. Nichols, the state’s senior clean air official,” the Times states. “The purpose of this letter is to put California on notice” that the deal with the four automakers “appears to be inconsistent with federal law,” the letter read, since authority to set fuel economy standards and influence regulations across the U.S. is “squarely vested” with Congress.

“The Trump administration has been attempting and failing to bully car companies for months now,” replied California Governor Gavin Newsom. “California stands up to bullies and will keep fighting for stronger clean car protections that protect the health and safety of our children and families.”

Anti-trust experts consulted by the Times said Trump’s justice department would likely argue that, by agreeing to a standard that exceeds the federal minimum, automakers could be imposing a more expensive range of vehicle models on buyers across the U.S.

“That anti-competitive theory relies on the idea that it is improper to agree to do more than what is required by the federal government,” said Louisiana State University environmental law specialist Nicholas Bryner. But “given that California has the legal authority to create emissions rules that are stricter than federal rules, this case doesn’t make any sense,” he added. “From an environmental perspective, this move seems designed to intimidate California and the automakers that signed onto the deal.”

New York University environmental law specialist Richard Revesz agreed the investigation amounts to a show of force aimed at companies that have displeased the current occupant of the White House. “These are four car companies standing in the way of something the president wants to do,” he told the Times. “Now the enormous prosecutorial power of the federal government is brought to bear against them. This should make any large companies very nervous.”

Even Myron Ebell, who led the Trump transition team for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and new runs the energy program at the industry-funded Competitive Enterprise Institute, acknowledged that anti-trust laws are often used as a “shot across the bow to get the attention of corporations”. He added that “the anti-trust statutes give the government quite a lot of power to threaten companies with anti-collusion charges.”

And sure enough, after the German government heard about the investigation, the Times says it warned Mercedes-Benz not to join the deal.

In a scathing editorial, the Times declares that the investigation “is an act of bullying, plain and simple: a nakedly political abuse of authority,” aimed at “four auto companies that had the temerity to defy the president by voluntarily agreeing to reduce auto emissions below the level required by current federal law.”

The U.S. Department of Justice “is supposed to prevent companies from acting in their own interest at the expense of the public. The four automakers, by contrast, are acting in the public interest,” the Times notes. “That the government of the United States would fight to loosen emissions standards in the face of the growing threat posed by climate change also boggles the mind. Not content to fiddle while the planet burns, Mr. Trump is fanning the flames.”

Continue Reading



in Auto & Alternative Vehicles, Energy Politics, Health & Safety, Legal & Regulatory, Sub-National Governments, United States

The latest climate news and analysis, direct to your inbox

Subscribe

Related Posts

Peoplepoweredbyenergy/Wikimedia Commons
Ending Emissions

Wind and Solar Cheaper than Gas Plants in Ontario and Alberta, Study Shows

February 7, 2023
271
The hottest summer days in a typical New York City year are now about 11 times more frequent than in the 19th century. Image: Andreas Komodromos via Flickr
Carbon Levels & Measurement

AI Predicts World Over 1.5°C Limit by 2030, Undercuts Climate Progress Reports

February 7, 2023
77
Andre Carrotflower/wikimedia commons
Severe Storms & Flooding

February Brings Record Cold, Widespread Power Outages to Much of North America

February 7, 2023
43

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Trending Stories

Peoplepoweredbyenergy/Wikimedia Commons

Wind and Solar Cheaper than Gas Plants in Ontario and Alberta, Study Shows

February 7, 2023
271
Beckyq6937/Wikimedia Commons

Solar Geoengineering Banned in Mexico After ‘Rogue’ Stunt

February 7, 2023
120
Michael E. Brunk/flickr

Green Building ‘Heroes’, Climate Contrarian ‘Zombies’, Shell Lawsuits, and ‘Sponge Cities’ to Solve Flooding

February 7, 2023
99
Peter Broster/wikimedia commons

Ottawa Mulls Higher-Speed Trains on Busy Toronto-Quebec City Corridor

February 7, 2023
86
The hottest summer days in a typical New York City year are now about 11 times more frequent than in the 19th century. Image: Andreas Komodromos via Flickr

AI Predicts World Over 1.5°C Limit by 2030, Undercuts Climate Progress Reports

February 7, 2023
77
Brian Robert Marshall/Geograph

Canada’s Solid Renewables Growth Falls Short of Net-Zero Ambitions

February 7, 2023
70

Recent Posts

Andre Carrotflower/wikimedia commons

February Brings Record Cold, Widespread Power Outages to Much of North America

February 7, 2023
43
Nemaska Lithium/Facebook

Lithium Mine Divides Nemaska Cree Over Impacts, Benefits

February 7, 2023
27
Mike Mozart/Flickr

BP Predicts Faster Oil and Gas Decline as Clean Energy Spending Hits $1.1T in 2022

February 4, 2023
365
Gina Dittmer/PublicDomainPictures

Canada Needs Oil and Gas Emissions Cap to Hit 2030 Goal: NZAB

January 31, 2023
213
CONFENIAE

Ecuador’s Amazon Drilling Plan Shows Need for Fossil Non-Proliferation Treaty

January 31, 2023
82
Ken Teegardin www.SeniorLiving.Org/flickr

Virtual Power Plants Hit an ‘Inflection Point’

January 31, 2023
141
Next Post
Isofotón/wikimedia commons

Solar+Storage Costs Less than Grid Electricity in Six European Cities

The Energy Mix - The climate news you need

Copyright 2023 © Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Copyright
  • Cookie Policy

Proudly partnering with…

scf_withtagline
No Result
View All Result
  • Canada
  • UK & Europe
  • Fossil Fuels
  • Ending Emissions
  • Community Climate Finance
  • Clean Electricity Grid
  • Cities & Communities

Copyright 2022 © Smarter Shift Inc. and Energy Mix Productions Inc. All rights reserved.

Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behaviour or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Manage options Manage services Manage vendors Read more about these purposes
View preferences
{title} {title} {title}