California’s EV mandate was struck down: What does this mean? 

On May 22, the U.S. Senate voted against California’s electric vehicle (EV) mandate. The California Air Resources Board (CARB) initially endorsed the Zero-Emission Vehicle requirement in 1990, coinciding with the introduction of the Low-Emission Vehicle regulation. 

With this vote, the U.S. Senate is impeding California’s goal of obtaining a net-zero economy by 2045. 

California’s EV mandate addresses climate change issues, reduces public health risks from air pollution and advances innovation in clean energy transportation, overall demonstrating how states can take action when the federal government falls short. 

Climate change is the driving force of rising sea levels, shrinking sea ice and hotter temperatures, causing extreme heat and unpredictable weather shifts. Relying heavily on energy sources derived from fossil fuels, such as gas, oil and coal, is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, which are accelerating the rate of climate change. 

Fossil fuels also contribute to air pollution, increasing the threat of health risks like lung cancer, neurological disorders, high-risk pregnancies and diabetes. Enforcing a mandate that requires automakers to market a higher percentage of zero-emission vehicles could not only decrease our carbon emissions, but also lower the exposure of public health risks. This makes the EV mandate a promising step toward protecting both the planet and the people who live on it. 

Political and economic interests have a strong influence on how quickly the U.S. can move away from its usage of fossil fuels. The Republican Party has maintained strong relationships with the oil industry, in which many companies have been known donors to conservative campaigns and political action committees. These long-lasting ties create a powerful incentive for Republican lawmakers to oppose policies that threaten the fossil fuel industry’s dominance, including mandates for a transition to electric vehicles. Republican support for the burning of fossil fuels could slow down the country’s transition to cleaner transportation, even though the need for it is becoming more urgent. 

While political interests linked to the oil industry may slow federal EV policy progress, the ability of EVs to cut carbon emissions and improve air quality makes them essential to climate change solutions.

The federal government’s enactment of both the Air Pollution Control Act of 1955 and the Clean Air Act of 1963 marked the beginning of national efforts to improve air quality. These developments show how combined policy efforts coupled with the rise of cleaner technologies, such as electric vehicles, have made measurable progress in reducing air pollution. 

The New York Times reported that between the 1950s and 1960s, dense smog in Los Angeles prevented visibility of the famous Hollywood sign from only a few miles away. Now, in Southern California specifically, higher numbers of electric vehicles have coincided with a significant decrease in air pollution, specifically smog.

The significant reduction of smog in a region once infamous for its hazardous air pollution demonstrates the potential benefits of combining regulatory efforts with innovative technology. Supporting the California EV mandate means supporting a cleaner, healthier future and a viable path toward achieving ambitious climate change goals. 

With this being said, the environmental impact of EVs is more nuanced. The production and disposal cycle of lithium-ion batteries — which are necessary components of EVs and plug-in hybrid vehicles — accelerates climate change through their energy-intensive production and the environmental risks posed by improper disposal

Making a real difference in the current climate crisis means changing more than just our vehicles. California’s EV mandate could reduce carbon emissions, but it is not a complete solution to stopping climate change.  

Even so, California’s electric vehicle mandate represents more than just a policy, it’s a necessary and determined commitment to addressing the urgent climate crisis and protecting public health. By pushing automakers to increase the availability of zero-emission vehicles, California is setting a powerful example for how states can rule in the fight against climate change when federal authority disappoints. 

Protecting the planet and public well-being depends on critical actions like this, which need to be supported and improved to make a lasting difference. The future of our planet is in our hands — we should care about what we are putting into the air we breathe. 

Maya Berger is an Opinion Intern for the spring 2025 quarter. She can be reached at bergerm2@uci.edu.

Edited by Rebecca Do and Joshua Gonzales.

Read More New U