Last Friday, District Judge Tana Lin issued a final judgment in Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation, determining USDOT’s February to August pause of the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program to be a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The ruling favored the plaintiffs, including both states and NGOs, who had argued that the pause created an environment of uncertainty, overstepped the spending authority granted to USDOT in the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act, and was arbitrary and capricious.  

The ruling also revealed information on the degree of progress in implementing the program. While reimbursement rates for NEVI funds are low, obligations in the program indicate that states plan to continue to build out their federally funded charging infrastructure despite the 2025 pause. While the ruling provides states with some certainty, states must now consider the potential impact of the pending FY 2026 appropriations bill, which transfers $879 million in NEVI funds into other Federal Highway Administration programs.  

NEVI Legal Updates 

The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program (NEVI) was set up in 2021 through the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act (IJJA) as a formula fund to be administered to states by the Federal Highway Administration with assistance from the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, which was also stood up under IIJA. In 2023, the Joint Office released its final rules for the program’s charging stations. Under the NEVI Program, states were required to submit and receive approval for state charging plans before fundings could be obligated. Available funds were apportioned to states proportionally to their general federal highway aid funding. 

Once state plans were approved, funds could be obligated, or legally promised, for specific activities. Similar to other highway formula programs, funds are not disbursed until states request reimbursement for costs associated with contractors, site hosts and vendors. According to the statute, NEVI funds can be utilized for the installation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure, operation and maintenance of charging infrastructure, and data sharing.  

In February 2025, Secretary Duffy’s Department of Transportation froze the NEVI program for review. Last Friday, Judge Tana Lin of the Western District of Washington entered final judgment in Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation in favor of the plaintiff, declaring the illegality of the Trump Administration’s freezing of NEVI formula funds in February 2025. The case was initially brought by 17 states impacted by the program pause and was then joined by a number of environmental NGOs, extending the scope of the ruling to states not in the original lawsuit. In June, Judge Lin issued a preliminary injunction for 14 of the states that initially sued, unfreezing funds. In August, USDOT released new guidance for NEVI, with simplified state planning requirements and greater flexibility for states to determine charging locations.  

NEVI Outcomes for EV Charging 

When the NEVI Program was created through the Infrastructure Investment Jobs Act, the program aimed to help build the national electric vehicle charging infrastructure, with the goal of having an EV station every 50 miles on highways. The program aims to provide a charging backbone across the country where the private sector may not build charging stations on its own. Charging stations under NEVI must have a minimum power of 150 kilowatts and be interoperable for all vehicle types.  

During the legal filing, information about the progress of the NEVI program implementation was revealed. Of the $4.4 billion made available through the program, only 2 percent, $94 million has been spent by states. However, states have obligated $1.4 billion in funds for future charging stations through 2028. Once states pay for these new stations, they will submit receipts to the federal government and receive reimbursements through the NEVI program, bringing up the current 2 percent level of reimbursements.  

Prior to the NEVI pause in February, states had $44 million in expenditures and $527 million in obligations. According to September 2025 data for the EV States Clearinghouse, there are 80 NEVI-funded charging locations with over 370 individual fast chargers opened through the program. According to this same dataset, NEVI funding has been obligated for 990 stations and 3,932 fast chargers. Current counts for the number of open charging stations through the program are around 121.  

The private sector is also building out EV charging infrastructure as well: according to Paren’s Q3 2025 data, the US has a total of 12,375 charging stations with 64,486 ports. The impacts of NEVI also go beyond the numbers of chargers. While the physical infrastructure impact of NEVI-funded chargers has not yet reached its initial vision of charging stations every fifty miles, since the start of the NEVI program there has been greater interoperability in charging along with continued private build out. Looking ahead, some states such as Ohio plan for an uptick in NEVI spending in 2026, with the state planning to construct 12 new charging stations in the spring.  

Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation Judgement 

According to the Plaintiff states, “Before February 6, about $1.5 billion was available for the States to obligate for NEVI projects; after February 6, that number dropped to zero.” While FHWA characterized their action as a temporary pause, the court characterized the action as a final agency action, as the existing program guidance was revoked, new guidance was issued, and states were not provided a timeline as to when the pause would end. The Court found the February freeze to be a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), not due to a reissuing of guidance, but rather due to the freezing of funds for an undetermined time period. The Court found the freezing of funds to be outside of the spending authorities given to the agency by Congress. The Court also found the revoking of existing state plans and the withholding of funds with little to no explanation to be arbitrary and capricious and a seven-month interruption to an existing partnership between USDOT and states implementing the program.  

The Court also highlighted that USDOT has lawful pathways through the IIJA in which it can update guidance but that the categorical pausing of funds exceeded this authority and was equivalent to a hiatus from executing the IIJA. The Court also raised concerns about damages from the pausing of the program indefinitely. States highlighted how they faced difficulties delivering planned projects on time and on budget due to the pause. States also raised concerns about damaged relationships with vendors for future projects due to the uncertainty inflicted from the pause.  

The summary judgment also raised concerns of a perpetuated state of uncertainty. The Court cited how the USDOT changed the August Interim Final Guidance into Final Guidance, stating, “In making the interim guidance final, Defendants place the NEVI Formula Program under never-ending review and, implicitly, under a never-ending threat of rescission or revision.” While some states (Colorado, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Vermont) have been able to fully obligate their funds, none of the states have received full reimbursement yet. Thus, the Court was concerned about future vulnerabilities to similar funding freezes.  

The Court determined that the Plaintiff states had experienced irreparable harm in their ability to adequately budget and plan for the future. The Court also identified harm to the NGO Plaintiff-Intervenors through the harm of unrealized infrastructure. Judge Lin stated, “A road does not exist simply to take up space as a ribbon of blacktop. Rather, it is meant to be driven on by people who find themselves near that road, and used to bring people from one place to another. To presume that the harm caused by unbuilt public infrastructure exclusively affects only whomever was supposed to build that infrastructure is to ignore the nature of transportation itself, as well as the ultimately functional purpose of infrastructure.”  

The ruling called for restoration of the pre-February 2025 legal status approved State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plans for any states that have not fully obligated FY22-25 funds. 

Future of the NEVI Program  

The final ruling in Washington v. U.S. Department of Transportation provides states with some additional certainty around the continued obligation and reimbursements of NEVI funds as they seek to continue to build out their chagrining infrastructure. States were also provided additional certainty around USDOT funding this month when USDOT filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of a ruling by a federal judge in Rhode Island that grant dollars cannot be predicated on state and local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. In King County v. Turner, a preliminary injunction for plaintiffs has been issued to prevent the conditioning of federal grants on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion policies, but this injunction is being actively challenged.  

Given USDOT’s August action to unfreeze the funds and last week’s judgement, states are in a good position to continue their NEVI implementation with lower concern about a future funding freeze through FHWA. Of greater concern would be the reduction in NEVI funding through Congressional action. The current FY 2026 USDOT appropriations act would transfer funds out of the NEVI program into general FHWA Highway Infrastructure Programs. If the package as it currently stands passes, then $503.8 million In NEVI formula grants, $300 million in NEVI competitive grants, and $75 million for the Joint Office will be transferred.