Senate Republicans say they are going to get rid of California’s electric vehicle mandate that threatens to drive up car prices, even if it means blowing up the chamber’s rules.

A government agency and the Senate parliamentarian have both warned that Congress doesn’t have the authority to erase a state regulation. But the Republican-led House and Senate are forging ahead nonetheless with a plan to overturn California’s requirement that all new passenger cars, trucks and SUVs sold in the state be zero-emission by 2035.

“What has come to the Senate is a rule, and rules are subject to the Congressional Review Act, and we plan to use it,” said Senate Republican Whip John Barrasso of Wyoming, disputing the parliamentarian’s advice.

Electric vehicles make up about 10% of new car sales. The Biden administration’s efforts to force EVs onto consumers through a now-reversed federal tailpipe emissions cap backfired due to the cars’ higher cost and limited travel range. 

Senate Republican leaders say they have the power to reverse California’s mandate under the Congressional Review Act, a law that enables Congress to overturn certain federal agency actions. 

California invoked the ban on gas vehicles using a trio of waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency that allowed it to establish stricter emission standards for new motor vehicles. California officials said the standards are needed to fight air pollution and tackle climate change. 

Eleven other states have adopted the California standard, and the automotive industry is warning it will raise auto prices and reduce choices for consumers.

The House, using the Congressional Review Act, voted to kill the EPA waivers last month, declaring the waivers are rules subject to their review and revocation. 

The vote garnered the support of all Republicans and 35 Democrats amid fears that California’s mandate will harm consumers by forcing them to buy electric vehicles and will result in higher car prices throughout the nation. 

The Senate GOP plans to pass the House measure and send it to President Trump for his signature. 

Unlike typical legislation, CRA measures are not subject to the filibuster, which means Republicans can pass them with a simple majority instead of the 60 votes needed to cut off a filibuster. The CRA prohibits the government from reissuing the rule, which means the EPA waivers that enable the higher emission standards could not be reinstated in future administrations.

If Congress overturns the waivers, it would defy a 2023 advisory opinion issued by the Government Accountability Office. Officials determined that the set of waivers was not a rule, but rather “an adjudicatory order not subject to CRA,” and advised that the waivers were akin to a license that concerns an issue specific to California. 

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough agreed with the GAO. Lawmakers have strictly abided by the decisions of the parliamentarian, who is appointed and considered nonpartisan.  

Democrats warned that if Republicans blow past Ms. MacDonough’s ruling and pass the CRA, revoking California’s EV mandate, they will essentially upend Senate precedent and clear the way for breaking every rule in the chamber. 

“Such an action would be a procedural nuclear option — a dramatic break from Senate precedent with profound institutional consequences,” Democratic leaders warned in a letter sent last week to Majority Leader John Thune.

Democrats said ignoring the parliamentarian would open the door to retroactively invalidating decades of agency rules and would even lead to the Senate ignoring the rulings of the parliamentarian on legislation beyond the Congressional Review Act.

“Put bluntly, there is no cabining a decision to overrule the parliamentarian,” Democrats wrote.

Mr. Thune hasn’t set a date for taking up the House-passed CRA in the Senate and on Tuesday told reporters “we’re exploring our options.”

The South Dakota Republican scoffed at the warning letter from Democrats, who, he pointed out, plotted to get rid of the Senate’s 60-vote threshold to ram their agenda through Congress when they were in the majority.  

“I think it’s pretty rich to have Democrats suggesting this after literally trying to get rid of the filibuster,” Mr. Thune said.

• Susan Ferrechio can be reached at sferrechio@washingtontimes.com.