1 00:00:03,520 --> 00:00:07,040 Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every 2 00:00:07,120 --> 00:00:09,680 Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most 3 00:00:09,720 --> 00:00:12,200 Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more 4 00:00:12,240 --> 00:00:16,160 Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple podcast, SoundCloud 5 00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:20,079 Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Climate change is 6 00:00:20,120 --> 00:00:22,919 Speaker 1: certainly in the news. On Friday, there was an international 7 00:00:23,000 --> 00:00:26,320 Speaker 1: walkout over climate change. Today, the United Nations holds a 8 00:00:26,400 --> 00:00:30,720 Speaker 1: Climate action summit. Now. Last week, the Trump administration revoked 9 00:00:30,760 --> 00:00:34,480 Speaker 1: California's power to set limits on auto emissions of greenhouse 10 00:00:34,520 --> 00:00:38,400 Speaker 1: gases that are stricter than the national government. California and 11 00:00:38,479 --> 00:00:42,000 Speaker 1: twenty two other states are joining together to sue the administration. 12 00:00:42,520 --> 00:00:46,120 Speaker 1: My guest is Pat Parento, professor at Vermont Law School. Pat, 13 00:00:46,200 --> 00:00:49,840 Speaker 1: let's start with the basics of the California lawsuit. Does 14 00:00:49,880 --> 00:00:54,080 Speaker 1: it raise novel questions under the Clean Air Act? Sure does, June. 15 00:00:54,160 --> 00:00:56,640 Speaker 1: This is the first time in fifty years that a 16 00:00:56,680 --> 00:01:00,320 Speaker 1: waiver for California has been revoked. There's nothing in the 17 00:01:00,400 --> 00:01:04,240 Speaker 1: Clean Air Act that authorizes the Trump administration or any 18 00:01:04,240 --> 00:01:08,319 Speaker 1: administration to actually revoke a waiver that's been in place, 19 00:01:08,480 --> 00:01:11,800 Speaker 1: So right off the bat, you have a question of 20 00:01:11,880 --> 00:01:16,160 Speaker 1: first impression for the courts. It also raises questions of 21 00:01:16,360 --> 00:01:21,959 Speaker 1: states rights. Will the Trump administration seemingly inconsistent position on 22 00:01:22,120 --> 00:01:25,920 Speaker 1: states rights play into this, Yes, I mean the Trump 23 00:01:25,959 --> 00:01:29,000 Speaker 1: administration listens to the red states, but not the blue states. 24 00:01:29,040 --> 00:01:32,520 Speaker 1: So twenty three states have already announced they will be 25 00:01:32,520 --> 00:01:37,040 Speaker 1: suing the Trump administration for revoking California's waiver because thirteen 26 00:01:37,120 --> 00:01:41,399 Speaker 1: states have actually adopted these California's standards, so they're immediately 27 00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:46,880 Speaker 1: and dramatically affected by revoking California's waiver. So this business 28 00:01:46,920 --> 00:01:50,480 Speaker 1: of cooperative federalism works only one way. If the states 29 00:01:50,480 --> 00:01:53,520 Speaker 1: that are in agreement with the Trump administration wants something, 30 00:01:53,600 --> 00:01:57,160 Speaker 1: they get it. If it states disagree with the Trump administration, 31 00:01:57,360 --> 00:02:00,840 Speaker 1: they don't get it. So do you think that California 32 00:02:00,880 --> 00:02:04,680 Speaker 1: will bring up things like gun control where the administration 33 00:02:04,760 --> 00:02:08,960 Speaker 1: favor state rights and abortion? Well, they've got better arguments 34 00:02:09,000 --> 00:02:13,120 Speaker 1: than that. Frankly, I mean this this decision is bad 35 00:02:13,120 --> 00:02:16,600 Speaker 1: for public health, it's bad for climate, and it's even 36 00:02:16,639 --> 00:02:19,200 Speaker 1: bad for business, which is probably the most ironic thing 37 00:02:19,240 --> 00:02:21,960 Speaker 1: of all. It's gonna cost jobs. It isn't going to 38 00:02:22,800 --> 00:02:26,880 Speaker 1: save jobs, it isn't safe. You know, the the acronym 39 00:02:27,040 --> 00:02:30,880 Speaker 1: for this revocation is safe. Well, there's an e p 40 00:02:31,040 --> 00:02:33,840 Speaker 1: A analysis in the administrative record that says it will 41 00:02:33,880 --> 00:02:38,040 Speaker 1: actually lead to slight increase in motor vehicle mortality, not 42 00:02:38,120 --> 00:02:42,240 Speaker 1: a decrease. The Trump administration is arguing that it's going 43 00:02:42,280 --> 00:02:44,640 Speaker 1: to save money. It isn't. It's going to cost the 44 00:02:44,680 --> 00:02:48,080 Speaker 1: average consumer three thousand dollars over the life of a 45 00:02:48,160 --> 00:02:52,240 Speaker 1: vehicle because of the reduced fuel costs. The total cost 46 00:02:52,440 --> 00:02:56,160 Speaker 1: estimates that are in this rulemaking or this decision package 47 00:02:56,639 --> 00:03:00,520 Speaker 1: is four and sixty billion dollars over the life of 48 00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:05,000 Speaker 1: these particular fleets of automobiles through the mid twenties. So 49 00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:08,640 Speaker 1: the states have really, I think the strongest possible arguments 50 00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:12,480 Speaker 1: I've seen to overturn a Trump decision. Well, this is 51 00:03:12,480 --> 00:03:17,519 Speaker 1: the sixtie lawsuit that California has filed against the Trump administration, 52 00:03:18,120 --> 00:03:22,120 Speaker 1: and a lot of those are over environmental concerns. Do 53 00:03:22,160 --> 00:03:24,880 Speaker 1: you have any sense because none of them have wound 54 00:03:24,919 --> 00:03:27,080 Speaker 1: their way through the courts yet, do you have any 55 00:03:27,120 --> 00:03:31,919 Speaker 1: sense of how California is doing on those? Doing very well? 56 00:03:31,960 --> 00:03:35,440 Speaker 1: I mean overall, the New York University Institute for Policy 57 00:03:35,480 --> 00:03:39,040 Speaker 1: Integrity tracks every one of these cases in Court, and 58 00:03:39,040 --> 00:03:42,920 Speaker 1: their analysis shows the Trump administration has lost of the 59 00:03:43,000 --> 00:03:46,040 Speaker 1: cases in which they've been challenged in California, has filed 60 00:03:46,240 --> 00:03:50,560 Speaker 1: forty one of those lawsuits and counting. So this administration, 61 00:03:50,800 --> 00:03:52,920 Speaker 1: you know, not only do they have bad policies, but 62 00:03:53,320 --> 00:03:57,840 Speaker 1: the courts are consistently overturning them for very routine violations 63 00:03:57,840 --> 00:04:01,040 Speaker 1: of the Administrative Procedure Act. In this case, it's going 64 00:04:01,080 --> 00:04:04,960 Speaker 1: to be a fundamental question of statutory interpretation. But again, 65 00:04:05,160 --> 00:04:08,280 Speaker 1: the Trump administration has no precedent to cite for what 66 00:04:08,320 --> 00:04:10,520 Speaker 1: they're doing. People can go to the website of the 67 00:04:10,560 --> 00:04:14,200 Speaker 1: Institute for Policy Integrity and read for yourself. Each case 68 00:04:14,320 --> 00:04:17,119 Speaker 1: is is digested with sites. I don't think the Trump 69 00:04:17,120 --> 00:04:20,400 Speaker 1: administration is doing very well in either the lower courts 70 00:04:20,520 --> 00:04:22,920 Speaker 1: or the courts of appeal. What they're counting on, of course, 71 00:04:23,320 --> 00:04:25,440 Speaker 1: is getting some of these cases to the United States 72 00:04:25,440 --> 00:04:29,360 Speaker 1: Supreme Court, whereas a result of President Trump's to appointees 73 00:04:29,400 --> 00:04:33,520 Speaker 1: Justice Coursa and Kavanaugh, they're banking on a more conservative 74 00:04:33,560 --> 00:04:37,680 Speaker 1: Supreme Court agreeing with some of their policies and overturning 75 00:04:37,680 --> 00:04:41,000 Speaker 1: the lower courts. The Trump administration has one a few 76 00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:43,599 Speaker 1: of those Supreme Court appeals, so I think that's what 77 00:04:43,680 --> 00:04:46,960 Speaker 1: they're counting on, but they may be overestimating how far 78 00:04:47,120 --> 00:04:49,760 Speaker 1: even a conservative court is going to be willing to 79 00:04:49,800 --> 00:04:54,479 Speaker 1: go to torque these statutes into a new interpretation that 80 00:04:54,560 --> 00:05:01,360 Speaker 1: has really significant practical impacts for people all over the country. Also, 81 00:05:01,560 --> 00:05:05,599 Speaker 1: the administration is expected to roll back national Obama era 82 00:05:05,720 --> 00:05:09,960 Speaker 1: tailpipe pollution standard. It requires cars to have a higher 83 00:05:10,000 --> 00:05:14,680 Speaker 1: fuel economy standard, and so I'm wondering how the average 84 00:05:14,720 --> 00:05:19,039 Speaker 1: consumer is going to feel about that. Why would endear 85 00:05:19,080 --> 00:05:22,480 Speaker 1: the Trump administration to the average consumer? I don't know. 86 00:05:22,640 --> 00:05:26,159 Speaker 1: Like I said that, the statistics suggests that the average 87 00:05:26,160 --> 00:05:30,080 Speaker 1: consumer is going to lose the benefit of about three 88 00:05:30,120 --> 00:05:32,560 Speaker 1: thousand dollars in fuel savings over the life of a 89 00:05:32,680 --> 00:05:38,680 Speaker 1: vehicle by by freezing these standards at instead of going 90 00:05:38,720 --> 00:05:41,600 Speaker 1: to the Obama level of about fifty five miles per 91 00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:46,760 Speaker 1: gallon by the mid into that range. So people are 92 00:05:46,760 --> 00:05:49,159 Speaker 1: going to actually be paying more at the pump and 93 00:05:49,279 --> 00:05:54,719 Speaker 1: not realizing the benefits of cleaner, more efficient vehicles. US manufacturers, 94 00:05:55,120 --> 00:05:57,960 Speaker 1: we've seen this story before, are once again going to 95 00:05:58,040 --> 00:06:01,640 Speaker 1: be at a competitive disadvantage with automakers all over the 96 00:06:01,680 --> 00:06:04,760 Speaker 1: rest of the world that are producing more efficient cars. 97 00:06:04,839 --> 00:06:08,640 Speaker 1: Recognizing the need to move into that cleaner future. And 98 00:06:09,040 --> 00:06:13,160 Speaker 1: of course four major automakers agreed with California. And what 99 00:06:13,200 --> 00:06:16,000 Speaker 1: did the Trump administration do It launched an anti trust 100 00:06:16,440 --> 00:06:21,080 Speaker 1: investigation as punishment against those four automakers for departing from 101 00:06:21,160 --> 00:06:24,200 Speaker 1: Trump's party line. So he doesn't even have the industry 102 00:06:24,240 --> 00:06:26,840 Speaker 1: behind him on this one. As far as what the 103 00:06:26,880 --> 00:06:29,800 Speaker 1: automakers have to do now as they're making cars, are 104 00:06:29,800 --> 00:06:32,120 Speaker 1: they going to stick with the old standards? They don't 105 00:06:32,160 --> 00:06:35,040 Speaker 1: know which standards are going to be in force. Well, 106 00:06:35,080 --> 00:06:38,039 Speaker 1: that's right, and that that's right. And that is perhaps 107 00:06:38,120 --> 00:06:41,760 Speaker 1: the most bizarre aspect of this rule. The claim is 108 00:06:41,800 --> 00:06:44,560 Speaker 1: that they're going to nationalize fuel economy. That's not true 109 00:06:44,600 --> 00:06:48,479 Speaker 1: at all. By revoking California's standard, they left the Obama 110 00:06:48,760 --> 00:06:52,080 Speaker 1: standards in place and they will remain in place until 111 00:06:52,440 --> 00:06:55,800 Speaker 1: the Trump administration finalizes the rulemaking that has had in 112 00:06:55,880 --> 00:06:59,960 Speaker 1: process for over a year to replace the Obama standards 113 00:07:00,080 --> 00:07:03,000 Speaker 1: with whatever standards Trump comes up with. So right now, 114 00:07:03,400 --> 00:07:06,440 Speaker 1: automakers have no idea what kind of cars they should 115 00:07:06,440 --> 00:07:08,920 Speaker 1: be making for which parts of the country. We had 116 00:07:08,960 --> 00:07:12,640 Speaker 1: a national standard for fuel efficiency. Now we don't, thank 117 00:07:12,680 --> 00:07:14,960 Speaker 1: you so much. Pat as always that's Pat Parento. He 118 00:07:15,040 --> 00:07:21,080 Speaker 1: is a professor at Vermont Law School. Thanks for listening 119 00:07:21,120 --> 00:07:24,400 Speaker 1: to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen 120 00:07:24,440 --> 00:07:28,000 Speaker 1: to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on Bloomberg 121 00:07:28,080 --> 00:07:35,320 Speaker 1: dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg Ye.