NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg lost a long-fought effort yesterday as the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in New York sided with the Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade in a suit that would have had New York cabbies switching from the beloved — and cheap and reliable – crown Victoria, to hybrid vehicles such as the Chevy Malibu Hybrid pictured with Bloomberg above.

Metropolitan Taxicab Board of Trade v. City of New York ( pdf ) centered around Bloomberg's mandate of a fuel economy standard for taxis (25 mpg and then a rollout to 30 mpg after a certain enter date) overstepping its bounds and infringing upon the Energy Policy and Conservation Act ( 49 USC 32919 ) and the Clean Air Act (CAA) (42 USC 7543 a). Bloomberg would have it so cabs not meeting the fuel economy / alternative fuel mandate would pay drivers less than those driving hybrid / clean diesel taxis.

The Clean Air Act explicitly states in part (a) that " No state shall require certification inspection, or any other approval relating to the control of emissions from any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine as condition precedent to the initial retail sale, titling (if any ), or registration of such motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine, or equipment."

Excerpts from Judge Paul A. Crotty decision after the jump.

 "The new rules expressly rely on a distinction between hybrid and non-hybrid vehicles….The requirement that a taxi be a hybrid in order to remember for the upwardly adjusted lease cap does nothing more than draw a distinction between vehicles with greater or lesser fuel-efficiency. The equivalency of the term "hybrid" with "greater fuel efficiency" for purposes of the new rules is self-evident….imposing reduced lease caps solely on the basis of whether or not a vehicle has a hybrid engine has no relation to an end other than an improvement in fuel economy crossways the taxi fleets operating in New York City.

"Indeed, the City is unable to refer any plausible alternative reason for the imposition of such an engine-based rule….The virtually complete overlap of the approved vehicles under the 25/30 MPG rule and the new rules underlines further that, in furtherance of the City's regulatory purpose, "hybrid" is simply a agent for "greater fuel efficiency."

"The City's new rules, based expressly on the fuel economy of a leased vehicle, plainly start within the scope of the EPCA preemption provision. The plaintiffs, therefore, have demonstrated a likelihood, indeed a certainty, of success on the merits, and we affirm the district court's preliminary injunction on this ground."

Get all that? No? Pretty much straight Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution): "…the Laws of the United States which shall be prefabricated in continuation thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the dominance of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby."  Federal law > State Law. There's probably some commerce clause nonsense in there, too as this deals with trade over state lines, but this isn't Law 101.

Long story short: NYC can't mandate a hybrid taxi fleet, or unduly penalize taxis for not meeting certain fuel economy standards. The City of New York's only option now is the Supreme Court.

( NYT Cityroom )