The Brief

President Donald Trump on yesterday signed three measures that block California’s mandates to phase out gas-powered cars and clean up diesel trucks. And California immediately struck back with a lawsuit and a vow to continue setting standards.

The move by Trump and Congress deals a substantial blow to the state’s aggressive transition to electric vehicles and could upend its decades-long authority to clean up its air pollution, which is the worst in the nation.

“We officially rescue the U.S. auto industry from destruction by terminating California’s electric vehicle mandate,” Trump said at the White House. “And they’re never coming back.” He said the state's zero-emission car phaseout "has been a disaster for this country."

Last month, Congress used the Congressional Review Act to revoke three waivers that the Biden administration granted to California to set standards phasing out gas-powered cars and diesel trucks. Trump’s signing makes that official. The dispute between California and the Trump administration and Congress highlights the growing political division over electric vehicles and air pollution policy.

Many legal experts, along with the Government Accountability Office and Senate Parliamentarian, said Congress has no authority to revoke the waivers.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed suit against Trump and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, arguing that it’s an unlawful use of the review act.

"Trump’s all-out assault on California continues – and this time he’s destroying our clean air and America’s global competitiveness in the process. We are suing to stop this latest illegal action by a President who is a wholly-owned subsidiary of big polluters," Gov. Gavin Newsom said in a statement Thursday.

Ten other states that are enforcing California's emissions rules joined the lawsuit — Colorado, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

Newsom on Thursday also issued an executive order that reaffirms the state's commitment to phasing out gas and diesel-powered vehicles. He directed the Air Resources Board to craft another mandate for cars and trucks — to either bolster its existing mandates or replace them in case they lose in court.

Newsom also directed the air board to create a public list of automakers and truck manufacturers that are following California's emissions rules, and companies that take early action to convert fleets to zero-emission trucks "regardless of the status of those regulations under federal law." And he ordered state agencies within 60 days to determine what more can be done to help consumers with the transition to electric vehicles, including eliminating obstacles to building more charging stations.

Because of its highly polluted air, Congress gave California the power to set its own, more stringent vehicle standards in the 1967 Clean Air Act. Before now, the federal government has never blocked any of California’s dozens of rules.

Under California’s mandate enacted in 2022, 35% of new 2026 model cars sold in the state must be zero-emissions, ramping up to 68% in 2030 and 100% in 2035. It builds on decades of tightening emissions standards for cars sold in the state.

Congress also blocked California’s 2020 Advanced Clean Trucks rule, an unprecedented measure that requires manufacturers to meet ramped-up targets for zero-emission heavy and medium-duty trucks for 2024 through 2035. A third vote revoked the waiver for a 2020 state regulation reducing nitrogen oxides — a key ingredient of smog — emitted by trucks and buses..

Trump said his actions mean those rules "are fully and expressly preempted by the Clean Air Act and cannot be implemented."

"Our Constitution does not allow one State special status to create standards that limit consumer choice and impose an electric vehicle mandate upon the entire Nation," he wrote. (California's mandate applies only to vehicles sold in the state; the other states agreed to enact the same rules.)

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

If you’re already planning to return a holiday gift that you’re just not that into, you could be in for a surprise.

More stores and shopping outlets are charging a restocking fee or a return surcharge of some kind. And many are also imposing deadlines or restrictions on returns, according to the National Retail Federation.

A quick search turned up these policies that might complicate your return plans:

• Best Buy charges a restocking fee of $45, or 15% of the purchase price on certain items, such as prepaid cell phones, cameras, drones and projector screens and … saunas.
• Macy’s offers free in-store and return shipping for its Star Rewards members, but non-members can face a $9.99 return shipping fee, plus tax, that will be deducted from your refund.
• UNIQLO requires online purchases to be returned online, not in a brick-and-mortar location.

How we got here

The reason is simple. We love to return stuff. Retailers are expected to see nearly $850 billion — with a "b" — in returns this year. And nearly 20% of online sales will be returned, according to a report by the National Retail Federation. (Interesting fact: Gen Zers are more likely to return an online purchase, the report found.)

Processing all those returns cuts into company profits. And then there’s the fraud, abuse and waste that goes along with it. (This includes everything from returning empty boxes, using and abusing items and then requesting returns, and something that I do quite a lot of — it’s called “bracketing,” where you buy two or more sizes of something to try them all on, planning on at least one return.)

It all adds up, and businesses are not in the business of wasting money.

“We’re seeing return figures that are much more than the norm,” said David Sobie, the Santa Monica-based co-founder and CEO of Happy Returns, a third-party business that you’ve probably seen inside places like Ulta. For consumers, it provides returns without a need for printer labels or packing tape. For businesses, this service provides built-in fraud protection.

He said limitations on returns in the form of restocking fees and charges are likely to increase in response to what businesses see as “costly consumer behaviors."

What you can do about it

Sobie said consumers can avoid unpleasant surprises with a little pre-purchase sleuthing:

• Ask about return policy details.
• Consider whether you might be better off checking the item out in person before purchasing.
• Find out about any “fine print” issues regarding return details, fees, or limitations. For example, if you purchase in person, can you return the item by mail?

And of course, hang on to receipts.

“I always say you want to check it out before you check out,” Sobie said.

Sitting in the Oval Office this month, President Donald Trump went on one of his trademark riffs, an aside about vehicles that are popular in Asia but impossible to buy new in the United States.

"They have a very small car. It's sort of like the Beetle used to be with the Volkswagen," he said. "They're very small. They're really cute."

In Japan, these vehicles are known as kei cars. They are, indeed, very small. They are, indisputably, very cute.

"But you're not allowed to build them" in the U.S., Trump went on. "I've authorized the secretary [of transportation] to immediately approve the production of those cars."

A shirt featuring a variety of kei cars was on display during a meeting of the Capital Kei Car Club.

(

Michael Noble Jr. for NPR

)

That news came in the middle of a press conference about the Trump administration relaxing fuel economy rules — a change that will make it easier for Americans to buy more of the big, fuel-guzzling trucks and SUVs that car buyers love.

Trump's endorsement surprised, delighted and somewhat confused American kei car enthusiasts.

It is not actually illegal to build tiny cars for the U.S. auto market. The problem is that kei cars built for foreign countries don't meet U.S. safety standards, so you can't import them unless you're willing to buy an antique. And companies could build tiny cars to U.S. standards, but given the American preference for big vehicles, they simply don't.

"If this is going to be a kick in the right direction to maybe get the domestic auto industry to reconsider cars like this," said Andrew Maxon, a kei car owner and the founder of the Capital Kei Car Club, "I'm all for it. I'll take what we can get."

An antique exemption 

Andrew Maxon, the founder of the Capital Kei Car Club, sits in his Autozam AZ-1.

(

Michael Noble Jr.

/

NPR

)

Kei cars, trucks and vans are very popular in Japan. But while new models might meet Japan's safety standards for things like airbags and seat belts, they're not designed to meet the very specific U.S. requirements.

So they can't be imported and driven in the U.S. unless they're at least 25 years old, which qualifies them as an antique and exempt from federal safety standards. That's why every vehicle at a recent Capital Kei Car Club meetup in Northern Virginia was at least 25.

Drivers raved about their tiny cars — their fun handling, their cute appearance, the delighted responses they get when they drive them around.

Drivers of kei vans and trucks also emphasized that the vehicles are practical. Ryan Douglass replaced his midsize American pickup with a pint-size Japanese one, but while it's shorter than a modern Mini Cooper, it still has a full 6-foot bed, longer than you'll find on a lot of massive trucks these days.

"I can lay down in the bed and not even touch the ends of it," he said. More to the point, he can fit in a sheet of plywood.

Unbeatable prices, with some drawbacks

Car enthusiasts work on a minor repair in the engine bay of a Suzuki Cappuccino.

(

Michael Noble Jr.

/

NPR

)

A new kei car, truck or van can be snagged in Japan for less than $15,000.

And the imported antiques? Douglass paid $8,000 for his truck, which runs great, and he says that was on the expensive end; he paid someone else to manage all the import paperwork.

Mainstream pickups are pricey in the U.S. right now, even when they're used. In November, the average price on Carfax.com was more than $34,000.

Douglass marvels at how much his kei truck saved him.

"I think I could get five or six of these and customize them to my heart's desire and still be cheaper than a brand-new truck that I can buy out of a dealership today," he said.

There are drawbacks, of course. Douglass' license plate warns drivers behind him that his vehicle is, in fact, "VRYSLW."

Ryan Douglass steps out of his Honda Acty.

(

Michael Noble Jr.

/

NPR

)

The snub-nosed front of the vehicle means there's no protective crumple zone in front of the driver. If you crash a kei truck, your knees take the hit directly. And because these vehicles are all antiques, their safety specs are antiquated too.

"I accept the terms and conditions," said Sergey Hall, whose 1992 Suzuki Cappuccino car is even smaller than Douglass' vehicle. "That's the best way to put it. I know that there are no safety features on it. No airbags, ABS [antilock braking system], no throttle position sensors or anything like that."

Safety concerns are why some states ban imported antique kei vehicles, even if federal rules allow them. That frustrates kei car enthusiasts, who note that motorcycles, which are not renowned for safety, are legal on highways.

"What is a 'safe' vehicle?" mused Dan Kobayashi, who drives a Honda Acty kei truck. He noted that a car that's slow and small is safer for pedestrians. And he pointed out that kei cars have great visibility, compared with bigger vehicles with giant hoods and chunky "A pillars" framing the windshield. So unlike the driver of a big SUV, Kobayashi said, "I don't have to worry about hitting kids in front of me, because I can see in front of me."

Still, kei car drivers do have to worry about whether other drivers can see them on American roads, where giant vehicles are moving at high speeds.

Little interest in little cars 

Nevi Bergeron sits behind the wheel in her Suzuki Cappuccino during a meeting of the Capital Kei Car Club.

(

Michael Noble Jr. for NPR

)

In his remarks, Trump said that companies "can't build" little cars in the U.S. and that he'd immediately authorize the production of tiny vehicles.

The thing is, building these vehicles is not actually prohibited in the United States.

Yes, federal safety standards block imports; for the record, the Transportation Department confirmed to NPR that those safety standards are not being waived for small cars. And, yes, some states restrict imported antiques because of safety concerns. So what's stopping automakers from building versions of these cars that do meet U.S. safety standards?

The American shopper.

When companies sold smaller cars in the past, "people didn't want to buy them," says Jessica Caldwell, head of insights at the car data site Edmunds.

"We look at the subcompact car — that is the smallest car sold in the United States. That segment is less than 1% of the market," she says. And it's shrinking, not growing.

Federal fuel economy rules have been criticized for incentivizing larger vehicles. Automakers have another incentive to go big: They make bigger profits on bigger vehicles.

But consumer preferences have also spoken loud and clear. Years ago, Daimler made a push to sell the Smart fortwo, a tiny car by any definition. It was cheap and cute, and it could fit sideways in a parking spot. But it was discontinued in 2019 after about a decade of disappointing sales.

Andrew Maxon walks by his Autozam AZ-1.

(

Michael Noble Jr. for NPR

)

At the Capitol Kei Car Club meetup, I asked everyone there — big fans of tiny cars — whether they think America writ large could learn to love them too. Could small, cheap and slow take off?

"If I had to bet, I would bet against it, unfortunately," Andy Creedon said, summing up the overwhelming consensus.

Kobayashi was more optimistic. His truck is useful, he said. And small vehicles like this are popular in other countries; why not in the U.S.? As he said, a little enviously: "Everybody else in the world has it."
Copyright 2025 NPR

Teamsters Local 2010, which represents trade workers across the Cal State University system, last week approved a strike if negotiations with management continue to stall.

The union says the system has reneged on paying previously agreed upon contractual raises and salary step increases. CSU officials say contingencies in place for those raises to go into effect require new state funding that has not happened.

What is Teamsters Local 2010?

The union represents 27,000 public education employees throughout the state, including the University of California system, Los Angeles Unified and the Cal State University system.

The 1,100 union members who work for the CSU include electricians, elevator mechanics, plumbers, carpenters, locksmiths and other trades workers.

What is each side's position?

In a press statement, the union said that instead of the previously agreed upon terms, the CSU is offering workers “a one-time bonus worth far less than what workers are owed.” Teamsters Local 2010 said it “won back salary steps in 2024 after nearly three decades of stagnation.”

In an email, CSU spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith described the strike authorization vote as “disappointing” and counterproductive. The current labor agreement between the system and the union, she added, contains “clear contingency provisions language that tied certain salary increases to the receipt of new, unallocated, ongoing state funding. Those contingencies were not met, leading to the current reopener negotiations on salary terms.”

When would a strike start?

Strike authorization votes are “procedural,” Bentley-Smith said, so this “does not mean a strike is imminent.” The CSU, she added, “is hopeful continued negotiations will result in the parties reaching an agreement.”

The union says there is no timeline for when the strike might happen. Some 94% of workers voted to authorize their bargaining team to call a strike, according to a statement released Friday. The move, the union said, gives the CSU a clear sign that "we are strike ready."

Last year, Teamsters Local 2010 was on the verge of striking alongside the system's faculty, but the union reached a last-minute deal with the CSU.

Learn more about CSU's financial picture

• Cal State Dominguez Hills students, faculty rally to save 6 'essential' programs from chopping block
• Cal State wants to offer bigger raises to campus presidents while cutting elsewhere
• Why did the CSU spend millions on ChatGPT amid a budget crisis? We asked school leaders

An immigration judge issues a stern warning: "If you don't show up, there is a good chance the court will order you removed."

She speaks to an immigrant from El Salvador in a quiet immigration courtroom in Hyattsville, Md., in November. Clad in an all-black dress jacket and shirt, the immigrant — who was identified only by the number of his case — swears that his last immigration notice was lost in the mail.

The judge tells him to check his mail regularly, ahead of his next appearance in January.

As the room empties out, the judge says out loud that there are a number of no-shows that day. The Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, attorney in court files motions to remove five people "in absentia." The judge grants it. Those people can now be deported.

A similar scene has played out, and increasingly so, in nearly every immigration court nationwide over the past year, according to immigration attorneys and NPR's early analysis of court data. The results mirror those of Joseph Gunther, an independent researcher, who has also been tracking the data closely. More immigrants are not showing up for their mandatory immigration court hearings, allowing the government to order their immediate deportation.

"What happened is that the word spread that if you go to court, you could get picked up from ICE," said Ruby Powers, an immigration lawyer based in Texas with cases all over the country.

In 2025, ICE turned to arrests directly from federal or immigration courtrooms in order to meet arrest quotas set by the Trump administration.

"Those instances weren't consistent around the country, but at least the word had spread, the fear had spread. And so individuals were really hesitant to go into court," Powers said.

The number of in absentia removals was generally already on an upward trend each year since 2022, said Andrew Arthur, resident law and policy fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, a nonprofit that advocates for lower levels of migration. Still, the number of such removal orders in fiscal year 2025 nearly tripled that of the previous year — topping over 50,000.

NPR calculated just how many people were ordered removed "in absentia."

Each of the top 10 cities with the largest number of completed immigration cases in those courts is on track to end the year with a higher rate of in absentia removals than they started. That is according to data from the Executive Office for Immigration Review — part of the Department of Justice — from January through November.

Each of these courts experienced an uptick in this kind of removal order starting in the summer months. That timeline is consistent with when immigration attorneys say ICE officers began arresting people inside the courts.

NPR has spoken with the family members of immigrants who came to court in New York, for example, in place of their parents or partners — out of concern their loved ones might be detained. New York's courts have become notorious this year for scenes of violent arrests and confrontations with federal officers.

Powers said that there are other reasons people may fear coming to court, including that they may not win their case or get deported to a third country. There are logistical barriers, too.

"A lot of times people don't even know that they have a hearing, or hearing dates can change without receiving the notice in the mail," Powers said. Sometimes immigrants can move and addresses are not immediately updated with the court, or go to places like apartment buildings that have less consistent mail delivery, she said. Notices can also be sent to completely incorrect addresses, which lawyers said has been an issue in years past.

Immigration attorneys across the country have noticed an uptick in this kind of removal order. Organizations like the Center for Immigration Studies have also spotted it.

In many cases, the Department of Homeland Security has to receive a removal order issued by an immigration judge before it can physically deport any person from the U.S., Arthur said.

"The more orders of removal in absentia or at the end of proceedings that are issued, the more people that ICE can then target for removal from the United States," he said.

Arthur said that immigrants who fail to appear opt to not take the government up on the offer for due process.

"The more people who are under final orders for removal … the more people who are going to end up in ICE custody because the law requires that ICE take into custody everybody who's under a final order of removal, notwithstanding the administration's stated focus on the worst," Arthur said.

"This appears to be well in excess of those historical trends," Arthur said.

Immigrants may have the opportunity to reopen their cases. However, most people in immigration court do not have legal representation, which they must pay for themselves.

Nonprofits like the organization Mobile Pathways have tracked a low rate of arrests in courts. But immigrant advocates said that doesn't mean the fear and negative perceptions go away.

"It probably falls into the narrative that the administration wants to be portrayed, that these individuals are not participating in the process that they're supposed to," Powers said, about the rise in no-show removal orders.

Some families she represents have fled violence, are working through trauma, or are navigating language and other barriers in addition to the immigration law system.

"[They] are just making the best decisions they can with the information they have provided to them," Powers said, adding that most immigrants are still showing up for their court appointments. "It's just because a lot of things are being stacked up against them. And that's why we're seeing these numbers."
Copyright 2025 NPR