Tesla prevails in first Autopilot wrongful-death suit
A jury has found Tesla not at fault in a lawsuit over a 2019 wrongful death which alleged that Autopilot caused a crash, killing one passenger and seriously injuring two.
In question was the death of 37-year-old Micah Lee, who was driving a Model 3 in 2019 in Menifee, CA (in the Inland Empire to the east of Los Angeles), and hit a palm tree at approximately 65 miles per hour, causing his death and the injury of two passengers, including an 8-year-old boy. The lawsuit was brought by the passengers.
The lawsuit alleged that Tesla knowingly marketed unsafe experimental software to the public, and that safety defects within the system led to the crash (in particular, a specific steering issue that was known by Tesla). Tesla responded that the driver had consumed alcohol (the driver’s blood alcohol level was at .05%, below California’s .08% legal limit) and that the driver is still responsible for driving when Autopilot is turned on.
A survivor in the vehicle at the time of the accident claimed that Autopilot was turned on at the time of the crash.
Tesla disputed this, saying it was unclear whether Autopilot was turned on – a difference from its typical modus operandi, which involves pulling vehicle logs and stating definitively whether and when Autopilot was on or off. Though these claims have sometimes been lodged when Autopilot was disengaged moments before a crash, when avoidance was no longer possible for the driver.
After four days of deliberations, the jury decided in Tesla’s favor, with a 9-3 decision that Tesla was not culpable.
While Tesla has won an autopilot injury lawsuit before, in April of this year, this is the first resolved lawsuit that has involved a death. That last lawsuit used the same reasoning – that drivers are still responsible for what happens behind the wheel while Autopilot or Full Self-Driving are engaged (despite the name of the latter system suggesting otherwise). Full Self-Driving was not publicly available at the time of Lee’s crash, though he had purchased the system for $6,000 expecting it to be available in the future.
Both of Tesla’s autonomous systems are “level 2” on the SAE’s driving automation scale, like most other new autonomous driving systems on the market these days. Although Autopilot is intended for highway use, Tesla’s FSD system can be activated in more situations than most cars. But there is no point at which the car assumed responsibility for driving – that responsibility always lies with the driver.
Since the trial began last month, Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a notable comment during his disastrous presence on Tesla’s Q3 conference call. He was asked whether and when Tesla would accept legal liability for autonomous drive systems, as Mercedes has just started doing with its Level 3 DRIVE PILOT system, the first of its kind in the US (read about our test drive of it in LA). Musk responded saying:
Well, there’s a lot of people that assume we have legal liability judging by the lawsuits. We’re certainly not being let that off the hook on that front, whether we’d like to or wouldn’t like to.
Elon Musk, CEO, Tesla
Later in the answer, Musk called Tesla’s AI systems “baby AGI.” AGI is an acronym for “artificial general intelligence,” which is a theorized technology for when computers become good enough at all tasks to be able to replace a human in basically any situation, not just in specialized situations. In short, it’s not what Tesla has and has nothing to do with the question.
Tesla is indeed currently facing several lawsuits over injuries and deaths that have happened in its vehicles, many alleging that Autopilot or FSD are responsible. In one, Tesla tried to argue in court that Musk’s recorded statements on self-driving “might have been deep fakes.”
We also learned recently, at the release of Musk’s biography, that he wanted to use Tesla’s in-car camera to spy on drivers and win autopilot lawsuits. Though that was apparently not necessary in this case.
Electrek’s Take
Questions like the one asked in this trial are interesting and difficult to answer, because they combine the concepts of legal liability, versus marketing materials, versus public perception.
Tesla is quite clear in official communications, like in operating manuals, in the car’s software itself, and so on, that drivers are still responsible for the vehicle when using Autopilot. Drivers accept agreements as such when first turning on the system.
Or at least, I think they do, since the first time I accepted it was so long ago. And that is the rub. People are also used to accepting long agreements whenever they turn on any system or use any piece of technology, and nobody reads those. Sometimes, these terms even include legally unenforceable provisions, depending on the venue in question.
And then, in terms of public perception, marketing, and in how Tesla has deliberately named the system, there is a view that Tesla’s cars really can drive themselves. Here’s Tesla explicitly saying “the car is driving itself” in 2016.
We here at Electrek, and our readership, know the difference between all of these concepts. We know that “Full Self-Driving” was (supposedly) named that way so that people can buy it ahead of time and eventually get access to the system when it finally reaches full self-driving capability (which should happen, uh, “next year”… in any given year). We know that “Autopilot” is meant to be a reference to how it works in airplanes, where a pilot is still required in the seat to take care of tasks other than cruising steadily. We know that Tesla only has a level 2 system, and that drivers still accept legal responsibility.
But when the general public gets a hold of technology, they tend to do things that you didn’t expect. That’s why caution is generally favorable when releasing experimental things to the public (and, early on, Tesla used to do this – giving early access to new Autopilot/FSD features to trusted beta testers, before wide release).
Despite being told before activating the software, and reminded often while the software is on, that the driver must keep their hands on the wheel, we all know that drivers don’t do that. That drivers pay less attention when the system is activated than when it isn’t. Studies have shown this, as well.
And so, while the jury found (probably correctly) that Tesla is not liable here, and while this is perhaps a good reminder to all Tesla drivers to keep paying attention to the road while you have Autopilot/FSD on, you are still driving, so act like it, we still think there is room for discussion about Tesla doing a better job of ensuring attention (for example, it just rolled out a driver attention monitoring feature using the cabin camera, six years after it started including those cameras in the Model 3).
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
BYD’s luxury brand, Yangwang, has claimed a new Nürburgring Nordschleife record for a production electric vehicle with its U9 hypercar.
The automaker released video of the Yangwang U9 Xtreme, a limited-edition version of the car, completing a lap of the “Green Hell” in a blistering 6:59.157 last month.
It made the U9 the first production EV to break the 7-minute barrier at the legendary German track.
Today, the run, driven by German racer Moritz Kranz, was officially certified by Nürburgring officials.
BYD announced:
Only weeks after becoming the fastest production car in history with a top speed of 496.22 km/h, the YANGWANG U9X has now conquered the Nürburgring Nordschleife in record time, completing the lap in 6:59.157, making it the fastest EV production vehicle around the track.
The time shaved a significant five seconds off the previous record, a 7:04.957 lap set earlier this year by the Xiaomi SU7 Ultra.
The production EV record at Nürburgring has been frequently broken over the last few years. It even changed hands several times in the same month at times – a testament to how rapidly EV technology is improving.
It is also a somewhat controversial title due to what people consider to be a “production vehicle”.
The Yangwang U9 Xtreme isn’t your average EV. It’s built on a 1200-volt platform and uses four electric motors (one at each wheel) to produce a combined output of nearly 3,000 hp. This is the same car that also claimed the world record for the fastest production car, hitting a top speed of 308 mph (496 km/h) last month.
It’s built in a limited-run production with only about 30 units reportedly planned – hence why some people might question the “production EV” part.
Electrek’s Take
I know there’s going to be some pushback on this, but regardless, a sub-7-minute lap in any car is serious business, and doing it in an EV is doubly impressive — credit where it’s due.
Does a Nürburgring lap time matter for 99.9% of EV buyers? Absolutely not. But it is an excellent showcase of the rapidly improving EV technology.
BYD and Yangwang are clearly utilizing the U9 platform to push their engineering capabilities, relying heavily on their “e⁴ Platform” and “DiSus-X” intelligent body control system to manage the immense power on a demanding track.
It’s impressive to see BYD produce something like the U9 at the very high end of the automotive spectrum, and then something like the $10,000 Seagull at the other end.
That’s quite a range.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
According to the latest “US Wind Energy Monitor” report from Wood Mackenzie and the American Clean Power Association (ACP), developers installed 593 megawatts (MW) of new wind capacity in Q2 2025 – a 60% drop from the same quarter last year. But the US wind industry is expected to rebound fast, with 51% of forecasted capacity to come online in Q4 and full-year installations projected to hit 7.7 gigawatts (GW).
Onshore developers are in a race
The onshore wind market outlook rose 3.6% quarter-over-quarter (2.4 GW) as developers push to complete projects before federal tax credits expire.
“We are seeing this uptick in the near term because many projects are shovel-ready or under construction, fully permitted, and with a turbine order in place,” said Leila Garcia da Fonseca, director of research at Wood Mackenzie. “However, we will face uncertainty later in this decade due to tariff investigations and permitting challenges.”
Federal policy uncertainty has created a lot of headaches for the wind industry in H1 2025. While the Treasury Department’s guidance on tax credit eligibility provided a 7% boost to near-term installations, new tariff investigations could negatively impact two-thirds of the supply chain for wind turbine components. The Department of Commerce’s national security probe into imported turbine components threatens to raise project costs by as much as one-third, potentially delaying or derailing late-decade projects.
“We’re seeing policy whiplash,” Garcia da Fonseca added. “Treasury guidance helps the advanced development pipeline, but tariff investigations and permitting hurdles are creating uncertainty beyond 2027.”
Western states are expected to lead wind activity through 2029, accounting for 31% of new capacity, followed by the Midwest. Illinois is set to overtake Texas with the most new onshore capacity in 2027, with more than 1.8 GW expected to come online.
Offshore wind’s five-year outlook
The offshore sector continues to face headwinds of federal stop-work orders and regulatory uncertainty. Even so, Wood Mackenzie projects 5.9 GW of offshore capacity will come online by 2029, with most of it arriving in 2026 and 2027.
“Recent federal stop-work orders and regulatory uncertainty have disrupted the offshore wind sector, weakening already fragile offtake opportunities and exposing the high investment risk in US offshore wind development,” Garcia da Fonseca said. “However, our five-year outlook remains unchanged, and 70% of forecasted capacity is already under construction.”
The next big year for US wind
Wood Mackenzie expects average annual installations of 9.1 GW over the next five years across onshore, offshore, and repowering projects. By the end of 2029, total installed wind capacity is projected to hit 196.5 GW, including about 35.5 GW from new onshore builds, 6 GW offshore, and 4.5 GW from repowering.
A major spike is expected in 2027, when shovel-ready projects are slated to connect at a record pace, adding 12.3 GW of new capacity.
“Despite political headwinds, wind projects are demonstrating market resilience,” said Garcia da Fonseca. “Wind continues to secure interconnection service agreements in 2025 despite anti-wind rhetoric. The technology maintains meaningful market presence even as solar and storage lead interconnection activity, with leadership concentrated in SPP and ERCOT.”
Read more: FERC: Solar + wind made up 90% of new US power generating capacity to July 2025
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
General Motors today pulled the plug on its BrightDrop electric delivery van program, announcing it will permanently end production at its CAMI Assembly plant in Ingersoll, Ontario.
This is a disappointing reversal for a program that was supposed to be a cornerstone of GM’s commercial EV ambitions.
In a statement, the company blamed a “slower than expected” commercial EV market, a “changing regulatory environment,” and the elimination of US tax credits for the decision. Production will not be moved elsewhere; the BrightDrop Zevo line is, for all intents and purposes, dead.
The move comes just two years after GM, with $500 million in Canadian government support, celebrated opening CAMI as Canada’s “first full-scale EV manufacturing plant.”
The company delivered a marginal 146 vans in the US in 2022 and just 497 in all of 2023.
But things were finally picking up this year despite a production pause in April.
Data from 2025 shows the ramp was finally hitting its stride, with sales reportedly jumping to 2,384 units in the third quarter alone—a massive 869% increase year-over-year. The company was on track to sell around 4,000 units this year.
That’s not a massive number, but it was heading in the right direction.
GM, however, sees it differently. As noted by industry observers, GM executives are comparing BrightDrop’s 4,000 sales to the 60,000+ sales of its ancient, gas-guzzling Chevy Express and GMC Savana vans, a platform that dates back to the 1990s.
While GM’s official statement to the CBC was that the decision was “simply a demand and a market-driven response,” the Unifor auto union isn’t buying it. The union, which represents the 1,200 laid-off workers, squarely blamed the “dangerous and destabilizing auto policies” of the Trump administration for undoing EV supports.
Furthermore, vehicle programs that cross the US-Canada border have faced significant challenges in 2025 due to the trade war launched by the Trump administration against Canada.
Electrek’s Take
It’s another EV pullback partly based on government actions.
But we can’t blame everything on Trump. GM is quick to pull back its EV programs due to political considerations, which do drive demand.
The company took half a billion dollars in taxpayer money to retool a factory, only to abandon it less than 36 months after the first van rolled off the line. They are abandoning what will undoubtedly be a growing market in the long term, ceding ground to Ford’s E-Transit and Rivian’s van, and blaming “low demand” at the very moment sales were beginning to spike.
Brightdrop’s lineup was a bit bigger than other commercial electric vans, which might have limited its market, but I still think that long-term, there will be a singnifcant market for electric vans in this segment.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024