In the ongoing battle against gas-powered vehicles, the Biden administration’s recent move to phase out such cars by 2032 is just the tip of the iceberg. Multiple states have taken it upon themselves to push even further.

According to reports from the U.K.’s Daily Mail, eight states are gearing up to outright ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. Leading this charge is none other than California, the perennial vanguard of progressive policies.

Joining California in this endeavor are states like Rhode Island, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Washington, with Washington, D.C., also throwing its hat into the ring, as reported by Money.

For residents of these states, the ban doesn’t mean an immediate end to their gas-powered rides; they can still keep and purchase used vehicles. But what lies ahead for consumers in these jurisdictions?

Electric vehicles (EVs) are already pricier than their gas-guzzling counterparts. And while proponents argue that EVs offer long-term cost savings through charging, horror stories abound about charging mishaps: from home fires to faulty stations and agonizingly long charging times, not to mention the strain on power grids.

These challenges translate to more expenses and time for consumers, not to mention the hefty price tag of replacing EV batteries. Moreover, environmental concerns persist even in the production process, with the mining of lithium-ion batteries and factory emissions contributing to pollution levels.

Despite these pressing issues, the left continues its relentless push toward a future dominated by EVs. But if automotive giants can’t fend off such government mandates, what chances do ordinary citizens have?

This plan serves as yet another example of the left’s skewed priorities and its warped definition of freedom.

Consider California, where the ACLU of Southern California boldly asserts a woman’s “fundamental right” to abortion without any justification. Yet, the same state has no qualms about dictating the types of vehicles its citizens can drive, all in the name of environmentalism.

Or take New York, where Gov. Cathy Hochul championed an executive order to facilitate “gender affirming care” for minors. Here, the state grants the freedom to alter young bodies while simultaneously restricting vehicle choices.

The left’s selective view of freedom is glaring. Why champion choice in matters like abortion and gender identity while denying individuals the freedom to choose their vehicles?

In the end, it’s a question of priorities and principles. Shouldn’t the freedom to pick our cars be as sacrosanct as the freedom to live or the freedom from bodily harm?