Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
This bill bars the EPA from implementing or enforcing the Agency’s Phase 3 greenhouse gas emissions rule for heavy-duty vehicles (89 Fed. Reg. 29440).
Progressives emphasize climate harms; conservatives emphasize consumer choice and jobs.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly performs substantive statutory change by prohibiting enforcement of a named EPA rule and by amending the Clean Air Act to forbid technology mandates and regulations that 'result in limited availability' of vehicles by engine type.
This bill bars the EPA from implementing or enforcing the Agency’s Phase 3 greenhouse gas emissions rule for heavy-duty vehicles (89 Fed.
Reg. 29440).
It amends Clean Air Act section 202(a)(2) to prohibit tailpipe regulations from mandating specific technologies or limiting new vehicle availability by engine type, and requires the EPA to revise regulations within two years to conform to that restriction.
Short, targeted rollback appeals to deregulatory constituencies but is high‑conflict and likely to stall without broad bipartisan support.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly performs substantive statutory change by prohibiting enforcement of a named EPA rule and by amending the Clean Air Act to forbid technology mandates and regulations that 'result in limited availability' of vehicles by engine type. It also sets a two‑year conformity deadline for EPA regulations.
Progressives emphasize climate harms; conservatives emphasize consumer choice and jobs.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize climate harms; conservatives emphasize consumer choice and jobs.
Likely views the bill as a rollback of federal climate authority that weakens emissions regulation for heavy-duty trucks.
Concerned it impedes the transition to lower-emitting technologies and undermines public health and climate goals.
Sees tradeoffs: the bill reduces risk of tech-forcing mandates but also weakens a specific federal climate rule.
Would weigh economic impacts, legal risks, and alternative policy tools before supporting.
Likely strongly supportive as it blocks an EPA rule seen as technology-forcing and protects consumer and industry choice.
Views changes as limiting federal overreach and preserving jobs in trucking and related sectors.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Short, targeted rollback appeals to deregulatory constituencies but is high‑conflict and likely to stall without broad bipartisan support.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize climate harms; conservatives emphasize consumer choice and jobs.
Short, targeted rollback appeals to deregulatory constituencies but is high‑conflict and likely to stall without broad bipartisan support.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly performs substantive statutory change by prohibiting enforcement of a named EPA rule and by amending the Clean Air Act to forbid technology mandates and regul…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.