Connect with us

California

California's green agenda is targeting every mode of transportation, despite wide opposition

Published

on

California's green agenda is targeting every mode of transportation, despite wide opposition


California’s state government, under the leadership of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, is pursuing a wide-ranging climate agenda targeting the transportation sector — actions that could have major economic implications.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB), the state’s main environmental regulator, has finalized new rules mandating a rapid transition from traditional petroleum-powered modes of transportation to zero-emissions alternatives as it pursues a sweeping climate agenda. CARB has identified passenger cars, heavy-duty trucking, freight trains and harbor vessels for the changeover. 

“We can solve this climate crisis if we focus on the big, bold steps necessary to cut pollution,” Newsom remarked in August 2022.

FEDERAL COURT STRIKES DOWN BIDEN’S CLIMATE RULE FOR STATES

Advertisement

The governor’s comments came shortly after CARB finalized regulations phasing out new gas-powered cars, and mandating 100% electric vehicle sales by 2035. Nearly 20 other states have since adopted those rules, meaning more than 40% of the country will be impacted by the mandate to some extent.

Environmentalists nationwide have set their sights on transportation because of its high carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions, which they say are contributing to global warming. According to the latest state data, the transportation sector accounts for 39% of California’s carbon emissions, the largest share of any sector and more than the industrial and power sectors combined.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has repeatedly pushed policies to accelerate the electrification of his state’s transportation sector. (Getty Images)

The state’s broad effort to electrify its transportation sector is part of the California Climate Commitment unveiled by Newsom two years ago. Under the plan, the state is phasing out reliance on fossil fuels, deploying green energy, cutting greenhouse gas emissions 85% by 2045 and decreasing oil demand by a staggering 94%.

TRUCKERS CHALLENGE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION OVER CLIMATE CRACKDOWN ON ELECTRIC BIG RIGS

Advertisement

The new regulations have received widespread criticism from Republicans, Democrats, consumer groups and industry associations, which argue such a plan is unworkable and not feasible. In a recent federal filing, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents major automakers and supports a transition to EVs, said it had “continued concerns with the feasibility” of the plan.

A driver charges his electric vehicle at a charging station in Monterey Park, California, on Aug. 31, 2022. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images)

“CARB has an ideological commitment to reducing emissions from transportation,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, the director of the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment. “They particularly don’t seem to like personal mobility, where people can go around anywhere they want in whatever kind of vehicle they want.

“So, they say people are just going to have to get used to electric vehicles, whether they like them or not, and go where the charging stations are. This seems to be an ideological, semi-religious, cultish viewpoint.”

FORMER AG WILLIAM BARR’S FREE MARKET GROUP SUES CALIFORNIA OVER EV TRUCK MANDATE

Advertisement

In 2023, 9.5% of new, light-duty vehicle sales were EVs, up from 7% in 2022 and 4.3% in 2021, according to data from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. California’s regulations kick in next year, requiring 35% of model year 2026 car purchases to be electric and, one year later, requiring 43% of model year 2027 cars to be electric.

In addition to that mandate, CARB adopted the nation’s most aggressive truck electrification plan in April 2023 and, shortly thereafter, regulations targeting freight train emissions. The former mandates wide swaths of the heavy-duty vehicle sector to be electrified by 2035, and the latter requires locomotives to begin transitioning to zero-emissions technology in 2030.

Less than 1% of new truck sales in the U.S. are zero-emissions, according to the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association. (Graham Hughes/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The American Trucking Associations blasted the heavy-duty vehicle rule, saying it sets “unrealistic targets and unachievable timelines.” And the Association of American Railroads — which is suing California over the freight train regulations — said “there is no clear path to zero emissions locomotives.”

“Commerce is the lifeblood of the economy and transportation of goods — most of which is by trucks and a lot of it also by train,” Marlo Lewis, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said in an interview. “An efficient economy would be one where the costs of transport are as low as possible, consistent with safety and real environmental concerns.”

Advertisement

FEWER AMERICANS WANT TO BUY AN EV — EVEN AS BIDEN PUSHES FOR STRONGEST-EVER CLIMATE CHANGE RULES

Lewis criticized CARB’s rules targeting trucking and freight trains, saying it would have negative economic consequences and potentially lead to higher consumer prices.

The American Trucking Associations estimates that trucks transported a whopping 11.5 billion tons of freight in 2022, equivalent to about 72% of total tonnage shipped nationwide. But less than 1% of new truck sales in the U.S. are zero emissions, according to the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association. And those electric trucks remain far costlier than diesel-powered models, they say. 

In response to California’s regulations, the Association of American Railroads said “there is no clear path to zero emissions locomotives.” (Luis Antonio Rojas/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Additionally, freight railroads haul another 1.6 billion tons of raw materials and finished goods every year, data from the Association of American Railroads shows.

Advertisement

“At a qualitative level, this is going to increase the cost of national transportation services — private, commercial, industrial — enormously. There’s just no doubt about that,” said Benjamin Zycher, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.

“Even if you assume and make wild assumptions about the benefits in terms of climate phenomena and all the rest, there’s just no way the benefits exceed the cost. It’s just impossible,” he added.

MAINE REJECTS SWEEPING ELECTRIC VEHICLE MANDATE IN BLOW TO GOVERNOR’S CLIMATE AGENDA

In addition, CARB recently amended its Commercial Harbor Craft regulation, requiring a wide array of vessels, including tugboats, towboats and barges, to install cleaner upgrades and newer technology. In particular, vessels must install diesel particulate filters, a major retrofit that has some groups concerned about safety. 

The American Waterways Operators (AWO), which represents the tugboat, towboat and barge industry, has opposed the regulation over concerns about diesel particulate filters (DPFs) catching fire. In her opinion piece in the DC Journal, Jennifer Carpenter, president and CEO of the AWO, wrote:

Advertisement

“While a truck driver can run from a fire, a vessel crew’s only option may be to abandon ship, which is hazardous and always a last resort. Introducing new fire risks to heavily trafficked ports with combustible cargoes is also dangerous — imagine the threats to safety, the environment and property if a DPF ignites on a tugboat carrying 110,000 barrels of fuel.”

And the U.S. Coast Guard penned a letter obtained by Politico in February, informing CARB that it would refuse to enforce the new mandate.

Rep. Michelle Steel, R-Calif., speaks during a news conference in October 2021. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

The vessel restrictions were also subject to a recent letter from a coalition of California Republicans led by Rep. Michelle Steel. The lawmakers called on CARB to delay implementation of the rules and consider stakeholder input.

“CARB seems hell-bent on further crippling our economy and burdening our workers,” Steel told Fox News Digital. “Whether it’s an absurd mandate that 100% of new car sales be zero-emission vehicles by 2035, or a downright dangerous requirement that towing vessels install faulty diesel particulate filters, CARB has repeatedly set forth regulations that defy logic and harm people.”

Advertisement

Rep. Jay Obernolte, R–Calif., called the CARB rule an “overreach” and “nonsensical.” 

“In the case of towing vessels, CARB is relying on untested technology that our own Coast Guard has indicated they will not be able to enforce. And when it comes to locomotives, there are no freight locomotives available that comply with the zero-emissions requirement of the CARB regulation, and the physics of weight and energy density strongly suggest there will still be none when the regulation’s target of 2030 is reached,” he said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Lys Mendez, communications director for CARB, said in a statement that the board has entered into a “Clean Truck Partnership” with heavy-duty truck manufacturers like Ford, Daimler, General Motors, Isuzu, Navistar, Volvo and others in an effort to “work toward shared goals around emissions reductions.”

“The benefits of a zero-emissions future are clear for Californians and the state continues to spur innovation that will bring better technology, savings and public health benefits for consumers,” Mendez said. “All of CARB’s regulations are developed as part of a rigorous and thorough public process, which includes significant engagement from interested parties such as regulated industries and consumers. As part of every rulemaking, CARB conducts a financial analysis, which includes an assessment of costs, cost-savings, and benefits — including from public health benefits such as reduced illness, hospitalization and death due to cleaner air.”

Advertisement

Fox News Digital News Editor Jenny DeHuff contributed to this report.



Source link

Advertisement

California

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly

Published

on

California bill to bar police from taking second job with ICE advances in state Assembly


Wednesday, March 4, 2026 4:43AM

CA bill to keep police from moonlighting with ICE advances

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KABC) — A bill that would prevent police officers from moonlighting with federal immigration enforcement agencies, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, is advancing through the California State Assembly.

AB 1537 passed the State Assembly’s committee on public safety on Tuesday.

The bill also requires that officers report any offers for secondary employment related to immigration enforcement to their place of work.

Those failing to comply could face decertification as a peace officer in California.

Advertisement

The bill was introduced by Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, whose district includes Mar Vista, Ladera Heights, Mid-Wilshire and parts of South Los Angeles.

Copyright © 2026 KABC Television, LLC. All rights reserved.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say

Published

on

Can’t win in primary election? Drop out, California Democrats say


play

California Democrats running for governor, your party has a message for you. Think carefully about your candidacy and campaign ahead of the swiftly approaching filing deadline.

California Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks urged candidates looking to assume the state’s highest office to “honestly assess the viability of their candidacy and campaign” as March 6, the final day to declare candidacy, nears. Hicks said that concerns about the crowded field of Democrat candidates “persist” in an open letter on Tuesday, March 3.

Advertisement

It comes as five leading candidates, several of which are Democrats — Katie Porter, Eric Swalwell, and Tom Steyer — are in a “virtual tie” per a recent poll, the Desert Sun reported, which is part of the USA TODAY Network.

Two Republican candidates pushing out California democrats in the gubernatorial bid may be “implausible,” but “it is not impossible,” Hicks said of the reasoning behind his latest message. Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, both Republicans, lead in RealClear Polling’s average of various polls.

The party chair spotlighted the need for California Democrats’ leadership, particularly over Proposition 50, the voter-approved measure that will temporarily implement new congressional district maps, paving the way for Democrats to secure more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“If in the unlikely event a Democrat failed to proceed to the general election for governor, there could be the potential for depressed Democratic turnout in California in November,” Hicks said. “The result would present a real risk to winning the congressional seats required and imperil Democrats’ chances to retake the House, cut Donald Trump’s term in half, and spare our nation from the pain many have endured since January 2025.”

Advertisement

During a press conference on March 2, Gov. Gavin Newsom said that when he is out in communities, people aren’t talking about the governor’s race. It’s an observation he called “interesting,” considering voting in the primary election starts in May.

“It’s been hard, I think, to focus on that race,” Newsom said, pointing to the attention on President Donald Trump, redistricting, and other matters.

What exactly is California Democratic Party asking of candidates?

In his open letter, Hicks gave directions to candidates.

First, assess your candidacy and campaign. If you don’t have a viable path to the general election, don’t file to get your name on the ballot for the primary election in June. Also, be prepared to suspend your campaign and endorse another candidate by April 15 if you decide to file but can’t show “meaningful progress towards winning the primary election.”

Advertisement

When is the next California election? Primary election in 2026

California voters will trim the field of candidates for governor on June 2. Only the two candidates who receive the most votes, regardless of party preference, will move on to the November election.  

Paris Barraza is a reporter covering Los Angeles and Southern California for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at pbarraza@usatodayco.com.



Source link

Continue Reading

California

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks California law limiting schools from telling parents about trans students


The U.S. Supreme Court has temporarily blocked a California law that limited when schools could require staff to disclose a student’s gender identity, clearing the way for schools to tell parents if their children identify as transgender without getting the students’ approval.

Rear view of multiracial students with hands raised in classroom at high school

The decision came after religious parents and educators, represented by the Thomas More Society, challenged California school policies aimed at preventing staff from disclosing a student’s gender identity.

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean and professor of law at the University of California Berkeley School of Law, said the ruling favors parents’ ability to be informed. “The Supreme Court today rules in favor of the claim of parents to be able to know the gender identity and gender pronoun of the children,” Chemerinsky said.

Advertisement
FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

FILE:{ }transgender flag against blue sky background { }(Photo: AdobeStock)

The decision temporarily blocks a state law that bans automatic parental notification requirements if students change their pronouns or gender expression at school. The Thomas More Society called the decision a major victory for parents, saying the court found California’s policy likely violates constitutional rights.

Chemerinsky said the Supreme Court’s action is an emergency ruling. “This law is now put on hold. So what this means is that schools can require that teachers and other staff inform parents of the gender identity or gender pronouns of children,” he said.

scotus.PNG

Kathie Moehlig, founder and executive director of Trans Family Support Services, said she is concerned about how the ruling could affect students who do not have supportive families.

“I am really concerned about our kids that do come from these non affirming homes, that they know that they’re going to get in trouble, that they’re going to possibly have violence brought against them possibly kicked out of their homes,” Moehlig said.

Moehlig said parents should eventually know, but that the conversation should happen when a student feels safe. “Our students are going to be less inclined to confide in any adults that might be able to help to get them access to mental healthcare, to a support system. They may still tell their peers but they’re certainly not going to tell any other adult,” she said.

Advertisement

Equality California, a LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, shared a statement:

Equality California, the nation’s largest statewide LGBTQ+ civil rights organization, released the following statement from Executive Director Tony Hoang in response to today’s U.S. Supreme Court shadow docket ruling in Mirabelli v. Bonta regarding California’s student privacy protections for transgender youth. Today’s decision by the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene in this case is deeply disturbing. By stepping in on an emergency basis, the Court has effectively upended California’s student privacy protections without hearing full arguments and before the judicial process has run its course. While not surprising, this move reflects a dangerous willingness to short-circuit the established judicial process to dismantle protections for transgender youth. While this case continues to be litigated, the ruling revives Judge Benitez’s prior decision, which broadly targets numerous California laws protecting transgender and gender-nonconforming students — threatening critical safeguards that prevent forced outing and allow educators to respect a student’s affirmed name and pronouns at school. These protections exist for one reason: to keep students safe and ensure schools remain places where young people can learn and thrive without fear. To be clear: today’s decision does not impact California’s SAFETY Act, which prohibits school districts from adopting policies that forcibly out transgender students. The SAFETY Act remains in full effect, and we will continue defending it. Transgender youth deserve dignity, safety, and the freedom to learn without fear. We will never stop fighting for transgender youth and their families. Equality California will continue working with parents, educators, and advocates to ensure schools remain safe, welcoming, and focused on the success and well-being of every student.

The case now returns to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which will decide whether the California law is constitutional.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending