By Brien Southward
U.S. District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill ruled that California's new low-carbon fuels mandate, intended to reduce the carbon footprints of transportation fuels, was unconstitutional. The judge cited the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, arguing that the laws discriminated against out-of-state producers by regulating other states' farming and ethanol production practices.
The rules require producers, refiners, and importers to reduce the carbon footprints of their fuels by 10 percent by 2020. Lawsuits had been brought against it in December 2009 by ethanol-related companies from all three groups.
California officials have said they will ask the judge to stay his ruling, so that California can deploy the nation’s first legal mandate for cleaner, low-emissions fuels. California regulators argued that provisions of the Clean Air Act give California, America’s most populous state, special provisions for controlling air pollution, shielding it from claims of interference with inter-state trade.
The refining industry welcomed the judge's ruling, saying that the rules would've caused California’s fuel prices, already the highest in the nation, to climb even higher. Proponents of the mandate say that it will reduce California’s dependence on petroleum by 20 percent and contribute to the state’s goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
