H.J. Res. 88 declares that the Environmental Protection Agency's decision to grant California a waiver under the Clean Air Act for the "Advanced Clean Cars II" standards "shall have no force or effect." The resolution cites chapter 8 of title 5 (the Congressional Review Act) and explicitly targets the EPA notice published at 90 Fed.
Reg. 642 (January 6, 2025).
This is consequential because an EPA waiver is the mechanism that lets California set motor-vehicle emissions and greenhouse-gas standards that are stricter than federal rules and lets other states adopt those standards. Disapproving the waiver removes that regulatory authorization and triggers downstream uncertainty for state regulators, vehicle manufacturers, supply chains, and electrification planning that relied on the waiver's legal clearance.
At a Glance
What It Does
The resolution disapproves the EPA's waiver decision for California's Advanced Clean Cars II standards and states the rule "shall have no force or effect." It invokes the Congressional Review Act as the statutory vehicle for disapproval.
Who It Affects
California and any state that planned to adopt California's ACC II standards, vehicle manufacturers and suppliers who designed products or investments around those standards, and market actors using the waiver as a regulatory signal for fleet electrification.
Why It Matters
The resolution removes federal authorization that enabled California's stricter vehicle standards and creates legal and commercial uncertainty about whether EPA may issue a similar waiver in the future without new legislation. That shifts the regulatory landscape for clean-vehicle policy nationwide.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The resolution takes aim at a narrow but powerful administrative decision: EPA's formal waiver of federal preemption that allowed California to implement Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II). Under the Clean Air Act, California can request a waiver to set its own tailpipe and related pollution standards; EPA's notice at 90 Fed.
Reg. 642 acknowledged that waiver. This joint resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to nullify that EPA decision, stating the waiver shall have no force or effect.
Beyond the simple nullification, the Congressional Review Act has a second practical consequence: when Congress disapproves a rule under the CRA, the agency is generally barred from issuing a new rule in "substantially the same" form unless Congress authorizes it by new law. That means this resolution not only strips the current waiver but also erects a legal barrier to EPA adopting a closely similar waiver soon after, absent fresh statutory authority.The effect on the ground is administrative and operational.
California would lose the federal authorization it was relying on to enforce ACC II; states that had adopted or planned to adopt California's standards would no longer have that pathway; vehicle manufacturers face a change in the regulatory baseline that can affect model planning, compliance timelines, and investment decisions; and regulators and courts may become focal points for litigation and uncertainty as parties test the limits of the CRA and the Clean Air Act's waiver provisions.Finally, because the resolution targets the waiver decision rather than the substantive content of ACC II, it does not itself rewrite vehicle emissions limits or set new federal standards. Instead, it removes the special preemption carve-out that allowed California's separate regulatory program to operate.
The practical downstream consequences will unfold through state rulemaking, manufacturer responses, and likely litigation over whether and how similar standards can be pursued going forward.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The resolution names and disapproves the EPA rule titled "California State Motor Vehicle and Engine Pollution Control Standards; Advanced Clean Cars II; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision" (90 Fed. Reg. 642, January 6, 2025).
It states the EPA waiver "shall have no force or effect," which, under the CRA framework, treats the agency action as nullified rather than merely suspended.
The resolution invokes chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code (the Congressional Review Act), as the statutory authority for disapproval.
Under the CRA's precedents, disapproval typically bars the agency from issuing a "substantially the same" rule in the future unless Congress enacts new legislation authorizing it, creating a legal barrier to prompt reissuance of a similar waiver.
The resolution targets the administrative clearance that allowed California — and other states that follow California standards — to enforce and adopt stricter motor-vehicle pollution standards than federal baseline rules.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Caption and subject of the resolution
The preamble identifies the document as a joint resolution under the First Session of the 119th Congress and names the EPA rule being targeted. It supplies the formal title required for congressional documents and anchors the vote to a specific Federal Register entry (90 Fed. Reg. 642). For practitioners, that citation is the precise administrative action that the resolution disapproves.
Congressional disapproval of EPA's waiver decision
The operative sentence declares, in plain terms, that Congress disapproves EPA's waiver decision relating to California's Advanced Clean Cars II. The clause ends with the blunt legal effect: the rule "shall have no force or effect." Practically, this is the CRA's mechanism for erasing the agency action's legal effect on federal administrative law and on parties that had relied on the waiver.
Formal enactment language and authentication
The closing lines are the standard attestation for a joint resolution — spaces for the Speaker of the House and the Vice President (as President of the Senate) to sign. While procedural, these lines are necessary to complete the resolution's formal enactment once passed and delivered for executive handling where required. They carry no substantive regulatory language but mark the point at which the resolution's legal effect would attach.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Automakers that favor a single national standard — They avoid having to certify different vehicle fleets to meet both federal and California-specific rules, reducing production and compliance complexity.
- States favoring federal uniformity — States that opposed adopting California's stricter standards retain a clearer path to follow only federal emissions rules without the option to adopt ACC II.
- Fleets and purchasers seeking lower upfront vehicle costs — Where ACC II would have raised compliance-driven vehicle prices, its disapproval may reduce near-term regulatory-driven cost increases for some buyers.
Who Bears the Cost
- California state regulators and agencies — They lose the federal waiver that authorized ACC II and the statutory tool to pursue more stringent vehicle-pollution limits under the Clean Air Act.
- States that planned to adopt California's ACC II standards — These states lose the legally cleared pathway to implement those standards, delaying or foreclosing state-level policy choices on vehicle emissions.
- Vehicle manufacturers and suppliers with sunk investments — Companies that already invested product designs, manufacturing changes, or supply-chain commitments expecting ACC II face regulatory uncertainty and potential stranded costs.
- Clean-vehicle market actors and infrastructure providers — Firms that sized production, charging infrastructure rollout, or procurement plans around ACC II's market signals may see demand forecasts and business cases altered.
- EPA and state agencies — They face administrative and legal burdens as they adjust rulemaking, certification, and enforcement operations to reflect the waiver's removal and manage resulting litigation risk.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill confronts a classic trade-off: prioritize national regulatory uniformity and reduced compliance complexity for industry, or preserve California's role as a laboratory for stricter vehicle-pollution and climate policy that other states can adopt; the CRA accomplishes one at the likely expense of the other, and it does so by using a procedural tool that can block similar future agency action absent new legislation.
The resolution uses the Congressional Review Act's blunt instrument to nullify an administrative waiver that sits at the intersection of federal law and state climate policy. That raises immediate questions about how quickly and in what form parties will respond: California could pursue litigation challenging the disapproval or pursue alternative regulatory avenues, manufacturers might accelerate or pause investments, and states that had planned to adopt ACC II must reassess their rulemaking timelines.
The CRA's "substantially the same" bar complicates EPA's options: even if the agency believes the waiver was legally correct, reissuing a similar decision could be legally barred unless Congress provides new authority.
Several practical uncertainties remain unresolved by the resolution's text. The resolution nullifies the waiver, but it does not itself rewrite federal emissions standards or prescribe an alternative compliance pathway, leaving a vacuum for rule implementation and enforcement.
Legal disputes are likely over the interaction between the CRA and the Clean Air Act's waiver procedure — for example, whether certain backend actions (like California's preexisting state rules or state-level certification actions taken prior to disapproval) remain operative and how courts will treat reliance interests. Finally, the resolution forces a choice between regulatory uniformity and state-driven stringency; resolving that choice will require either new federal legislation or a patchwork of state and industry responses.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.