“States’ rights” to reduce pollution: 👎
“States’ rights” to own slaves: 👍
this post was submitted on 28 May 2025
50 points (98.1% liked)
Electric Vehicles
1303 readers
283 users here now
Overview:
Electric Vehicles are a key part of our tomorrow and how we get there. If we can get all the fossil fuel vehicles off our roads, out of our seas and out of our skies, we'll have a much better environment. This community is where we discuss the various different vehicles and news stories regarding electric transportation.
Related communities:
- !automotive@discuss.tchncs.de
- !avs@futurology.today
- !byd@lemmy.world
- !ebike@lemm.ee
- !energy@slrpnk.net
- !geely@lemmy.world
- !micromobility@lemmy.world
- !polestar@lemmy.ca
- !rivian@lemmy.zip
- !teslamotors@lemmy.zip
- !xiaomi@lemdro.id
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
bikes are a great mode of transportation. they keep you active and healthy. they are fun. you are the only fuel they need. and they are cheap in comparison to a car. they can last multiple lifetimes if treated well and maintained. you dont need a license to ride one, and no insurance payments.
not for everyone, sure. but they are an option. also they are much better for the environment than any vehicle can possibly be.
just throwing out another option for those who can/care to give them a shot.
@Alloi@lemmy.world
@Sunshine@lemmy.ca you are talking about a traditional human pedals, bike goes bike right? Because most ebikes batteries won't last more than 10 years.
Many ebikes have removable batteries so you can take them out to charge more conveniently. Manufacturers sell spares.
sure am.
For the first time I wonder if Musk joining the republicans wasn’t calculated in some way to tank EV sales.
I don't understand how the Senate can block a Californian law. Aren't states supposed to have the autonomy to make their own laws?
I believe it’s because CA’s laws would become the defacto law due to how much control it has over the auto market.
This. AKA the interstate commerce clause. Unfortunately the argument is not without merit.
Federal law supersedes state law.
Can't states have laws that are stricter than federal law though? California has a lot of laws that are stricter than federal laws, for example tighter regulation of guns, better worker protection (for things like overtime and rest breaks), etc. I don't get how laws about cars are any different.
From TFA:
The same goes for the Senate’s vote to block California’s program banning gas-guzzlers by 2035. The state has the power to do this under a long-standing waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing it to set its own emissions standards.
In this case, California was utilizing a federal law to effectively ban ICE vehicles and Congress closed that "loop hole."
State laws are wholly operating within federal law, insofar as the federal government has the authority granted to it by the constitution to do so. Anything not granted to the federal government is defacto state territory according to their constitution.
I'm not the guy to really explain your specific questions though. Most of that has to do with a long history of legal precedent and constitutional law over hundreds of years.
So the Ministry of ~~Love~~ ~~Truth~~ ~~Peace~~ Clean Air legally prohibits states from having clean air?
The clean air act lowered the standards, yes
Sure sucks to be a US automaker. Meanwhile, the rest of the world eats our lunch. That's just about the level of incompetence I expect from Republicans.