Judge Cites ‘The Simpsons’ While Blocking Trump-Era EV Charger Freeze

In a case that mixes judicial authority with pop culture flair, a federal judge in Seattle has dealt a significant blow to the Trump administration’s efforts to freeze funding for electric vehicle infrastructure. In a ruling that raised eyebrows across political and legal circles, U.S. District Judge Tana Lin not only halted the administration’s suspension of EV charger grants but also quoted “The Simpsons” to underscore the national importance of addressing range anxiety for electric vehicle drivers.

The decision, which restores funding for 14 states that were plaintiffs in a multi-state lawsuit, could have lasting implications on the separation of powers, the executive branch’s authority over Congressionally approved programs, and the future of America’s EV transition.

Pop Culture Meets Constitutional Law

In an unusual yet pointed moment, Judge Lin’s ruling cited a 1995 episode of “The Simpsons” in which Homer’s reunion with his long-lost mother is cut short because her “electric van only has minutes of juice left.” Lin used the reference to illustrate the concept of “range anxiety”—the fear electric vehicle drivers experience when unsure of where to find the next charging station.

“Some 26 years later, Congress sought to address the phenomenon that has come to be known as ‘range anxiety,’” Lin wrote, referring to the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in 2021.

The inclusion of pop culture wasn’t just colorful writing—it served as a backdrop for the court’s broader argument: that infrastructure funding allocated by Congress cannot be blocked arbitrarily by the executive branch.

The Lawsuit: 16 States vs. the Trump Administration

At the center of this legal battle is the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program, a $5 billion federal initiative passed under President Joe Biden as part of the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure package. Its mission: build a nationwide network of EV chargers to accelerate adoption and reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration halted new funding disbursements under the NEVI program and ordered a pause on state-level spending, citing the need to revise guidance. This abrupt decision—made without Congressional approval—sparked outrage among governors, transportation officials, and clean energy advocates across the country.

In response, 16 states and the District of Columbia filed a lawsuit accusing the Department of Transportation (DOT) of illegally withholding funds that had already been authorized and, in some cases, disbursed. The plaintiffs argued that the freeze not only disrupted long-term planning but also threatened millions in ongoing EV infrastructure projects.

According to a report from the Associated Press, $3.3 billion of the $5 billion allocated had already been made available to states prior to the freeze.

Judge Lin Sides with the States

Judge Lin’s ruling grants a preliminary injunction to 14 of the suing states, forcing the federal government to unfreeze funds and allow EV charging projects to resume. She stated unequivocally that the Trump administration had exceeded its legal authority and undermined the will of Congress.

“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… are indifferent to subject matter and blind to personality,” Lin wrote. “When the Executive Branch treads upon the will of the Legislative Branch… it is the Court’s responsibility to remediate the situation.”

Not all states were granted relief. Lin denied similar injunctions to the District of Columbia, Minnesota, and Vermont, citing a lack of compelling evidence of “irreparable harm” that would justify court intervention.

California Leads the Legal Charge

California, often a frontrunner in environmental regulation and EV adoption, played a key role in the lawsuit. Attorney General Rob Bonta responded to the ruling with strong words for the Trump administration.

“The administration cannot dismiss programs illegally… just so that the President’s Big Oil friends can continue basking in record-breaking profits,” Bonta said in a public statement. “We are pleased with today’s order blocking the Administration’s unconstitutional attempt to do so.”

The ruling also comes on the heels of President Trump signing executive resolutions aimed at dismantling California’s authority to phase out internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035—a state policy that has drawn national attention and controversy.

What This Means for Investors and the EV Industry

The decision has immediate and longer-term implications for EV manufacturers, utility companies, and infrastructure contractors involved in building out charging networks.

Short-Term: Projects Resume

With the injunction in place, billions in previously frozen funds will now be reactivated—allowing states like California, New York, and Illinois to resume halted EV charger construction and planning. Companies like ChargePoint Holdings (NYSE: CHPT), Blink Charging (NASDAQ: BLNK), and EVgo Inc. (NASDAQ: EVGO) may see renewed contract activity and state-level demand.

Mid to Long-Term: Legal Precedent and Market Certainty

Perhaps more importantly, the ruling sets a precedent limiting the power of future administrations to unilaterally alter or suspend Congressionally approved spending programs without legislative input. This injects a degree of policy stability into the sector—something investors and developers sorely need in a politically polarized environment.

EV-related equities had been under pressure amid uncertainty about the regulatory environment. With this ruling, states can proceed with some confidence that NEVI funds are legally protected—at least until a higher court potentially rules otherwise.

Big Picture: Trump’s Broader Anti-EV Agenda

The ruling also comes at a politically sensitive moment. President Trump’s recent actions targeting EV policies—including revoking California’s waiver under the Clean Air Act and promoting fossil fuel expansion—have made clear that his administration intends to slow the EV transition.

By citing constitutional concerns, Judge Lin’s decision injects legal resistance into that agenda and emboldens states to push forward with clean energy programs regardless of federal roadblocks.

What Happens Next?

The court’s order is scheduled to take effect on July 2, 2025. Until then, the Trump administration has the opportunity to appeal the decision, potentially escalating the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Legal analysts suggest that the administration may argue that the DOT has discretion in how it administers federal programs, especially when guidance is still being developed. But given Judge Lin’s strong language about constitutional overreach, the road ahead for the administration may be legally uphill.

For now, the affected states are moving quickly to reboot EV charging initiatives that were paused, and contractors are preparing to ramp up activity again.

A Win for EV Infrastructure

While the headlines are focused on “The Simpsons” quote, the ruling is a serious rebuke of executive overreach and a strong defense of Congressional authority.

For states, consumers, and investors focused on building a cleaner transportation future, this is a rare and clear legal victory. And for the courts, it’s a reminder that even in a divided political climate, constitutional checks and balances still carry real weight—pop culture references included.

About Author