Federal Judge Stays Freeze on Federal Funding for EV Infrastructure

SEATTLE — A federal judge in Washington state temporarily suspended the Trump administration’s freeze of roughly $1 billion in funding intended to help states create a network of electric vehicle charging stations and related infrastructure along major roadways.

Created as part of the bipartisan infrastructure law, the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program allocated $5 billion to states over five years to strategically deploy EV charging infrastructure along so-called Alternative Fuel Corridors designated by the Federal Highway Administration.

The initial tranche of funding was to have been directed towards building out a national network of DC fast chargers no more than 50 miles apart and within one mile of a highway exit. 

The program also aimed to establish a reliable and interconnected network to facilitate data collection to be used to guide later stages of building out a national EV charging infrastructure.

Based on the assurances of the officials then overseeing the program, the recipient states lined up private-sector partnerships, solicited bids on construction projects, and identified and secured sites where the new EV infrastructure would be built.

Everything changed earlier this year, when the new Trump administration opted to disregard Congress’ mandate in regard to the funding and “immediately pause the disbursement of funds appropriated through … the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act including but not limited to funds for electric vehicle charging stations made available through the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program.” 

Sixteen states, plus the District of Columbia, sued the Department of Transportation and the FHWA, claiming the agencies’ action was an unlawful seizure of legislative authority under the separation-of-powers doctrine of the Constitution and a clear example of overreach by the executive branch of the federal government.

In describing the inspiration for the program, U.S. District Judge Tana Lin pointed to a 1995 episode of “The Simpsons” in which Homer must cut short a tearful goodbye with his long-lost mother after her traveling companions protest that their “electric van only has 20 minutes of juice left!” 

“Some 26 years later, Congress sought to address the phenomenon that has come to be known as ‘range anxiety’: the unease experienced by electric vehicle drivers when they are unsure where the next charging station might be, and whether their car’s battery has sufficient charge to get them there,” she wrote.

“Although range anxiety, EV charging stations, and current DOT leadership’s policy preferences lurk in the background of this case, the bedrock doctrines of separation of powers and agency accountability, as enshrined in Constitution and statute, are indifferent to subject matter and blind to personality,” Lin wrote later in the opinion. 

“When the executive branch treads upon the will of the legislative branch, and when an administrative agency acts contrary to law, it is the court’s responsibility to remediate the situation and restore the balance of power. Such remediation and restoration are what the court undertakes herein,” she said. 

The states granted injunctive relief were Washington, Oregon, Colorado, California, Arizona, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin. 

While her grant of a preliminary injunction surely satisfied a majority of the plaintiffs, she also held that three of them, the District of Columbia, Minnesota and Vermont, did not provide the court with any evidence that they would suffer irreparable harm absent injunctive relief.

“Although these three plaintiffs, like the others, established sufficient injury to satisfy the ripeness, they have not provided any testimony, beyond what is alleged in the complaint, that demonstrates, say, a delayed or canceled project, a budget thrown into chaos, or a withdrawn request for proposals. Therefore … the court cannot grant them the requested relief.” 

She went on to explain that she’s unconcerned about some plaintiffs being granted relief and not others because the administration has said it plans to issue new guidance for the program that comports with its current policies, and that states will have to submit new deployment plans, potentially rendering the current controversy moot.

Lin gave the defendants until July 1 to appeal her order. If they don’t do so, the injunction will go into effect on July 2.

A group of nonprofits, including the Sierra Club, Climate Solutions, Earthjustice, Natural Resources Defense Council, Plug In America, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, and the Southern Environmental Law Center are seeking to join the litigation.

In a joint statement, the groups said Wednesday that while Lin’s order is a promising “first step,” they won’t be satisfied until the funding is restored for all impacted states.

“Many communities that currently lack access to EV charging stations are the same ones already overburdened with air pollution from transportation. Slowing the transition to EVs only prolongs the harm these communities face,” they said.

“Unfreezing the NEVI funds is essential for advancing clean, equitable and more affordable  transportation, reducing vehicle pollution, and protecting public health, which is why full implementation of the program is so important,” the groups added.

Dan can be reached at [email protected] and @DanMcCue