A coalition of 16 states and the District of Columbia has launched a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration, alleging it unlawfully halted $5 billion in taxpayer funding for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations.
The suit, filed April 7, 2025, in the District Court for the Western District of Washington, spearheaded by attorneys general from California, Colorado, and Washington, centers on the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program, established under the Biden administration’s pork-filled, debt-exploding, 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The plaintiffs claim the termination of these funds—$3.3 billion of which was already allocated—violates congressional authority and threatens their green dreams. But these are pipedreams, nightmares for taxpayers and devotees of truth, and insults to those who laid out in the Constitution.
As Katabella Roberts reports for the Epoch Times, the NEVI program was designed to funnel $5 billion over five years to states to build EV charging infrastructure, with the lofty goal of establishing 500,000 public chargers by 2030. This was sold as a critical step toward “net-zero emissions” by 2050, wrapped in the familiar packaging of combating the unproven specter of anthropogenic climate change. The Trump administration, however, hit the brakes in February 2025, directing states to halt spending and suspending the program, pending review. The U.S. Transportation Department rescinded approvals of state plans, prompting howls from the suing states, which argue that only Congress, having appropriated the funds, can dictate their use. California Attorney General Rob Bonta called the move “short-sighted,” claiming it undermines the “future of transportation.”
Which might prompt one to pause and wonder how an apparatchik of government can determine what the vaunted “future of transportation” is.
The future of transportation is supposed to be directed by consumers, who transmit their interests through the market and signal to makers what they want or do not want.
Yet, in a statement announcing the suit, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Bonta pushed hard on their soviet-style hubris and added a touch of Climate Cult fearmongering, saying that the Trump Administration’s decision:
“…will devastate the ability of states to build the charging infrastructure necessary for making EVs accessible to more consumers, combating climate change, reducing other harmful pollution, and supporting the states’ green economies.”
Curiously, both men, and all the other governors and attorneys general who are pushing this suit, swear oaths to the US Constitution, and their blather about “green economies” and “combating climate change” not only runs contrary to real, trustworthy data, it runs contrary to the Constitution, itself.
Nowhere in its enumerated powers does it grant the federal government authority to fund EV charging stations or meddle in state transportation infrastructure beyond post roads (Article I, Section 8). The 10th Amendment reserves such powers to the states or the people, meaning this federal boondoggle was unconstitutional from the start. The Biden-era Congress may have passed the law, but legislative fiat doesn’t trump the Constitution’s limits. The Trump administration’s decision to pull the plug, while framed as a policy shift, inadvertently aligns with this principle—though don’t expect them to admit it’s about constitutional fidelity rather than political differences.
And don’t expect Newsom and his fellow plaintiffs to acknowledge the emptiness of the climate rhetoric driving this EV push. The NEVI program, like much of the green agenda, hinges on the narrative that human activity is catastrophically warming the planet, necessitating massive federal intervention. Yet, as I’ve noted for MRCTV, the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis is far from settled. Take, for instance, the 2009 Climategate scandal, where leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit revealed scientists manipulating data, suppressing dissent, and dodging transparency. Or consider the inefficiencies of wind farms, which I’ve critiqued for their high costs, environmental impact, and reliance on subsidies—hardly the eco-saviors the Climate Cultists claim them to be.
The EV charger program is cut from the same collectivist cloth: a federally funded pipe dream propped up by fearmongering, pork spending, and hubris, not science.
Related: Trump Administration Halts Controversial New York Offshore Wind Farm Scheme
The states’ lawsuit argues that halting the funds will “devastate” their ability to build the auto-industry they deem to be the future, but EV adoption is already in decline and real car-makers are retreating from electrics.
In fact, EVs accounted for just 8% of U.S. new car sales last year, as reported by the AP and Motorintelligence.com, as mainstream buyers hesitate. Why? EVs take a long time to charge, they represent a high risk of fire, they don’t allow easy hauling of heavy loads, they don’t function well in cold weather, they require many dangerous metals for their batteries, and they are extremely expensive.
Ironically, even Tesla, led by Elon Musk—now heading Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency to slash federal spending—benefited from over $30 million in NEVI funds, raking in millions to expand its charger network. This highlights the cronyism baked into such programs: taxpayer money funneled to connected corporations under the guise of “public good,” when there is no such thing as “public good.” Each of us is an individual, and determines – or is supposed to determine – what is good for our own interests.
The suing states—California, New York, New Jersey, Washington, Hawaii, Maryland, Arizona, Minnesota, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin, Illinois, Delaware, Oregon, Colorado— and D.C. frame this as a battle for congressional prerogative, citing the $3 billion-plus already allocated. But their indignation sidesteps the deeper issue: Congress itself overstepped its constitutional bounds by creating this program. The judiciary, if it respects the Constitution, should recognize that federal funding for state-level EV infrastructure lacks any enumerated basis. A parallel case offers insight: in April 2025, a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to disburse $12 million to Radio Free Europe, ruling that withholding congressionally appropriated funds violated the Administrative Procedure Act. That decision leaned on Congress’s authority to allocate funds, but it doesn’t erase the constitutional question of whether such allocations are permissible in the first place.
The plaintiffs warn of “irreparable harm” to their green ambitions, echoing the climate alarmism that’s long justified federal power grabs. But the real harm lies in eroding constitutional limits and forcing taxpayers to bankroll projects tied to dubious climate claims.