HJRES-87-119
Became Public Law No: 119-15.
Sponsored by John James (R-MI)
What it does
This joint resolution, enacted as Public Law 119-15, uses the Congressional Review Act to nullify an EPA notice published April 6, 2023 (88 Fed. Reg. 20688) that granted California a waiver from federal Clean Air Act preemption. The waiver had allowed California's Air Resources Board to enforce its own heavy-duty vehicle and engine emission standards, including the Advanced Clean Trucks rule, Zero Emission Airport Shuttle rule, and related warranty and maintenance provisions. By nullifying the waiver, the resolution restores federal preemption and prevents California from enforcing those state-level emission standards on heavy-duty trucks and engines.
Who benefits
Trucking companies and freight operators that would have faced compliance costs under California's zero-emission truck mandates. Heavy-duty truck and engine manufacturers who would have needed to retool product lines for California's market. Businesses reliant on diesel trucking for supply chains, including retailers, manufacturers, and agricultural shippers. States that had adopted or planned to adopt California's standards under the Clean Air Act's "follow-on" provision, who are relieved of those requirements. Consumers who may have faced higher shipping costs passed through from compliance expenses.
Who is hurt
California and the 17+ states that had adopted or intended to adopt California's heavy-duty truck standards, losing their ability to enforce stricter local rules. Zero-emission commercial vehicle manufacturers and startups that had invested in California-market compliance. Airport communities and urban areas near freight corridors that would have seen reduced diesel emissions under the California rules. Public health advocates focused on particulate matter and NOx pollution in communities near ports and highways. Workers in the zero-emission truck supply chain, including battery and charging infrastructure companies.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that California's Advanced Clean Trucks mandate — requiring up to 40% of new heavy-duty truck sales to be zero-emission by 2024 — imposes unrealistic timelines on an industry where zero-emission technology remains commercially immature for long-haul applications. They contend that a patchwork of state-level emission standards effectively gives one state veto power over national vehicle markets, undermining the uniformity Congress intended when it established federal preemption under the Clean Air Act, and that the EPA waiver process was used to authorize sweeping market transformation rather than incremental emission improvements.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that Congress explicitly created California's waiver authority in the Clean Air Act precisely because California had pre-existing emission standards and a demonstrated need to address severe air quality problems, and that this waiver mechanism has functioned for over 50 years without congressional nullification. They contend that revoking the waiver via the Congressional Review Act sets a precedent that undermines the statutory framework states rely on to address localized pollution, and that communities near ports and freight corridors — which are disproportionately low-income — will bear the health costs of delayed emission reductions.
Constitutional context
The Clean Air Act's California waiver provision rests on Congress's Commerce Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) to regulate interstate vehicle markets while carving out a limited exception for California. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts independently review whether the EPA's waiver grant was within its statutory authority, without deferring to the agency's interpretation — a question that was already being litigated before this resolution passed. The use of the Congressional Review Act to nullify an EPA "notice of decision" (rather than a traditional rulemaking) also raises questions about whether the CRA applies to this type of agency action.
Checks and balances
Congress gains authority by nullifying an executive branch agency decision; the CRA bars EPA from issuing a substantially similar rule without new congressional authorization, limiting future executive action in this space.
Historical precedent
Congress has never previously used the Congressional Review Act to nullify a California Clean Air Act waiver; EPA has granted California over 100 waivers since 1968, and prior revocations were attempted only through executive agency action, not legislation.