LOS ANGELES, July 3 (Reuters) - Opponents of

California's ambitious targets for electric car adoption to

lower greenhouse gas emissions took their case to the U.S.

Supreme Court this week, the latest salvo against the state's

campaign to fight climate change.

Energy companies, corn growers and industry associations

have long opposed strong environmental rules in California, for

decades the only state with power to request a waiver from the

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to set its own vehicle

emissions regulations that are more stringent than the federal

standard.

The EPA made that exception because the nation's most

populous state has unique factors like geography and a large

number of vehicles that make smog a worse problem than in other

states.

Other states are allowed to adopt California's stricter

tailpipe emission rules, and automakers tend to follow to avoid

having to produce different vehicles for different states.

In its request for hearing, filed on Tuesday, Valero Energy

Corp's ( VLO ) Diamond Alternative Energy and other plaintiffs

said EPA's grant of a waiver for California's Advanced Clean Car

program for model years 2015 through 2025 enabled the state to

"operate as a quasi-federal regulator on global climate change."

The Diamond plaintiffs rely on the Supreme Court's 2022

ruling in West Virginia v. EPA. That decision invoked the "major

questions" doctrine, which requires explicit congressional

authorization before regulators can take consequential actions

on issues of vast economic, political and societal impact.

California Governor Gavin Newsom wants the state to be a

leader in fighting climate change and has targeted

transportation because it accounts for roughly a quarter of

emissions. A spokesperson for the governor was not immediately

available for comment.

This request for a Supreme Court review comes as oil

companies, farming groups that contribute to the production of

ethanol, trucking firms and business associations also are suing

in state and federal court to stop California's rules aimed at

slashing greenhouse gas emissions from boxy package delivery

trucks to long-distance semi trucks.

The Clean Air Act, which EPA relies on for setting tailpipe

emissions rules, does not expressly address greenhouse gas

emissions from mobile sources such as cars and trucks.

Plaintiffs in Tuesday's filing also said California does not

meet the legal requirement for "compelling and extraordinary"

provisions that would justify a waiver.

"Climate change is not an 'extraordinary' condition within

California" because it is global and not local, they said.

California also does not need its own emissions standards to

meet global climate change since its efforts would have no

discernable effect on those conditions in the state, they added.

The question of whether California may set greenhouse gas

emissions for itself and other states "is undeniably major," the

plaintiffs said, especially since California has the EPA for a

waiver for its plan to end sales of gasoline-only vehicles by

2035.

"The waiver and authority claimed here are the key parts of

a coordinated agency strategy to convert the Nation from

liquid-fuel-powered vehicles to electric vehicles," the filing

said, pointing out that would hurt demand for petroleum fuels

and biofuels.

Other plaintiffs include American Fuel & Petrochemical

Manufacturers, Kansas Corn Growers Association and the National

Association of Convenience Stores.