An automotive trade association based out of Washington D.C. has sued Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey over the enforcement of a “right to repair” law approved by voters in 2023.
The complaint alleges that enforcement of the law right now would violate the Constitution’s Due Process Clause, as well as the Supremacy Clause. It is also argued that the law is currently unenforceable due to alleged violations of the Maine Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by Attorney General Frey.
Question 4 — approved by 65.3 percent of voters — required car manufacturers to standardize on-board diagnostic systems, as well as allow remote access to these systems and a car’s mechanical data for both owners and non-dealership repair facilities.
[RELATED: Mainers Resoundingly Support Automotive “Right to Repair” in Tuesday’s Election]
During the campaign season, generic parts manufacturers and independent repair shops came out in support of the measure, while representatives of the auto industry advocated against it.
The Maine Automotive Right to Repair Committee was the leading campaign in support of Question 4 leading up to the election, while the primary opposition came from organizations like the Alliance for Automotive Innovation — who is responsible for bringing this lawsuit — and the Maine Automobile Dealers Association.
Several other states have enacted right to repair laws in recent years, although provisions specifically related to the automotive right to repair are a relatively recent and rare phenomenon.
Click Here to Read the Full Text of the Law
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation is seeking injunctive relief to prevent the state’s “right to repair” law from being enforced until further action is taken by Maine’s Attorney General.
Privacy and security concerns feature prominently in the association’s lawsuit, as the law requires vehicle manufacturers to provide “external access to vehicle data” that cannot be moderated by anyone except an “independent entity” established by the Attorney General.
The group also pushes back on the characterization of this as a “right to repair” law more generally, alleging that it has the “effect of stripping vehicle manufacturers of their ability to secure access to the data within motor vehicles, except as established and administered by an ‘independent entity.'”
According to the organization, the Maine Attorney General has allegedly not taken the steps necessary to make providing the required data possible, as they say it is the responsibility of his office to create an “independent entity” to administer access to a “standardized” platform.
Based on their interpretation of the law, the establishment of an “independent entity” by the Attorney General is critical to manufacturers’ ability to uphold their end of the deal.
That entity, and the system of standardizing data about automobiles, have since been statutorily mandated by what has come to be termed the “Data Law.”
“Vehicle manufacturers cannot even begin to attempt to comply with requirements that have not yet been established by an entity that does not yet exist,” the lawsuit says. “Thus, the threatened enforcement of the Data Law is unconstitutional and unlawful, and/or the Data Law itself is unconstitutionally vague.”
The organization contends that the only possible construction of the law that would make it enforceable in the absence of action from the Attorney General is one where a single term is used to refer to two separate things, which they say would make it unconstitutionally vague.
Either way, the association argues that enforcing the law would violate their constitutional due process rights, whether that be because compliance is impossible at this time or because the law is “hopelessly vague.”
If compliance were to be required right now — absent appropriate action from the Attorney General — they allege that it would force them to violate the federal National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, as they say drivers’ data would no longer be secure.
Because only an “independent entity” established by the Attorney General would be allowed to manage access to a vehicle’s data, they say that complying with the law could still potentially open the door for anyone — whether that be independent repairmen or hackers — to get their hands on it.
“Whatever form they take, the consequences of such an event due to compromised or non-existent access controls could be disastrous,” they write in their complaint. “Threats to cybersecurity are an ever-present danger today — and require constant vigilance from manufacturers to stave off.”
The auto industry advocates argue that the Attorney General has failed to meet his obligations under the law, constituting a “failure or refusal of an agency to act” and “refusal or failure to adopt a rule where the adoption of a rule is required by law.”
“It remains to be seen what the designated ‘independent entity’ will do to ensure that access to [on board diagnostic] systems is sufficiently secure,” the lawsuit reads. “However, by disregarding the mandate that an independent entity be responsible for ensuring such cyber-secure access, while simultaneously failing to designate such an entity, the Attorney General has stymied vehicle manufacturers’ ability to maintain vehicle safety while complying with the Data Law.”
As a result of this lawsuit, the Alliance for Automotive Innovation is seeking to have the court issue an injunction preventing the enforcement of certain sections in the “right to repair” law until the Attorney General establishes an “independent entity” and manufacturers have had the opportunity to comply with the access requirements set by it.
Click Here to Read the Full Complaint
“This is an example of putting the cart before the horse,” the Alliance for Automotive Innovation said in a statement.
“Before automakers can comply, the law requires the attorney general to first establish an ‘independent entity’ to securely administer access to vehicle data,” they said. “The independent entity hasn’t been established. That’s not in dispute. Compliance with the law right now is not possible.”
Click Here to Read the Full Press Release
The Maine Attorney General’s Office has told members of the media that they do not comment on pending litigation.
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="34780 https://www.themainewire.com/?p=34780">7 Comments
Sounds like little Aaron Frey got in over his head .
I’m not surprised . If he doesn’t have Janet Mills holding his hand and telling him exactly what to do he’d be lost . He’s just another democrat tool that needs to be purged from Augusta in 2026
Aaron Frey? You mean the bug guy from men in black?
I never understood how this was supposed to work when it came up for a vote in the first place .
If it’s Kia’s car , and Kia’s part , and Kia’s computer , and Kia’s technology , and Kia’s proprietary information , why do they have to share it with Elmer’s Garage who spent nothing for any of the aforementioned moving parts ?
Sounded to me like more “ We are all in this together “ ….” Share the wealth “ ….” We won’t wait “ …Janet Mills Playbook Lingo ….recited by her little AG puppet Aaron Frey …..
I guess we shall see what we shall see .
@ Benny Weaver
One thing it does is keep Kia honest. Without it for many of the systems you then have no choice, you would have to go to Kia. You still can go to Kia if you prefer. With no competition Kia could then charge you whatever they saw fit. Who would control that?
Its your car. You paid for the technology, the computer, the programs, the warranty. All included in the price of the car. Don’t remember seeing any lease agreements for access to the data. If they don’t want me to have access to my data, on my computer, in my car then maybe they should drop the price of the car.
Yeah, there’s a long line of them holding each others hands… who’s holding Janet’s??? I’m sending up the bat signal for the “Guys of Doge” (you know, the ones who wear the biggest MAGA hats ever..) to hit up Maine…..
Aaron Frey is a WEASEL.