H.J.Res. 88 · 119th Congress · House

Providing congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency relating to "California State Motor Vehicle and Engine

Signed into LawEnvironment

Introduced 2025-04-02 · Sponsored by Rep. Joyce, John [R-PA-13] (R-PA) · Last updated 2026-03-31

Last action (2025-06-12): Became Public Law No: 119-16.

Summary

Strikes down the EPA waiver that allowed California to require increasing percentages of new car sales to be zero-emission vehicles, reaching 100% by 2035. Because other states can legally copy California's auto standards, this one waiver was on track to become a de facto EV mandate across much of the country without Congress ever voting on it.

The Good

+

Prevents California from mandating electric vehicle sales timelines

California's Advanced Clean Cars II required increasing percentages of new car sales to be zero-emission, reaching 100% by 2035. Overturning the EPA waiver blocks this mandate, preserving consumer choice to buy gasoline vehicles without state-imposed phase-out schedules.

+

Avoids cascading effect to other states

Under Section 177 of the Clean Air Act, other states can adopt California's standards. Over a dozen states had adopted or were considering ACC II. Revoking the waiver prevents a de facto national EV mandate enacted without congressional approval.

The Bad

-

Removes the most aggressive state-level clean vehicle program

ACC II was the single most impactful policy driving EV adoption in the United States, affecting states representing over a third of the national auto market. Without it, the pace of transition to zero-emission vehicles depends entirely on consumer economics and federal standards, which are weaker.

-

May undermine automaker investment plans already in progress

Major automakers invested billions in EV manufacturing based partly on anticipated regulatory requirements. Removing the policy signal may cause companies to slow or abandon these investments, affecting factory jobs and supply chain development in states that were preparing for EV production.

Vote Record

Senate, 2025-05-22

Passage (Senate)

51 Yea44 Nay0 NV
Republicans
50Y / 0N / 3NV
Democrats
1Y / 42N / 2NV
Independents
0Y / 2N

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #277

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

Senate, 2025-05-21

Motion to Proceed

51 Yea46 Nay0 NV
Republicans
51Y / 0N / 2NV
Democrats
0Y / 44N / 1NV
Independents
0Y / 2N

Passed Congress.gov — Senate Roll Call #276

Senate vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

House, 2025-05-01

Bipartisan

Passage (House)

246 Yea164 Nay0 NV
Republicans
211Y / 0N / 8NV
Democrats
35Y / 164N / 14NV

Passed Congress.gov — House Roll Call #114

House vote by state

AK
ME
WI
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
DC
DE
MD
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
TX
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
HI
FL

Hover over a state to see its delegation

Republican majority Yea
Bipartisan split
No vote data

All Sources

Everything on this page ties back to one of these. Click through if you want to check.