Open for Business: A Look at NHTSA Auto Safety Investigations in the Second Trump Administration

The second Trump administration has seen drastic changes in the enforcement practices of many federal regulatory agencies. One area where investigative activity continues to be robust is auto safety. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has, in, recent months, been opening investigations at a brisk pace. Some of NHTSA’s work, particularly relating to autonomous operations and counterfeit equipment, has attracted substantial public attention. Other investigations have been more business as usual.

The New Investigations

After a brief pause at the start of the second Trump administration, auto safety investigations have since ramped up. During the first two months of the administration, NHTSA initiated just one new investigation. But from the second half of March through the end of November, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation opened 28 new investigations. That is more than the 21 investigations that NHTSA opened during the same period in 2024.

The investigations that NHTSA opened from March through November of 2025 come in several types:

• Seventeen of the investigations are Preliminary Evaluations (PEs). A PE is typically the initial level of investigation, where NHTSA examines a potential safety issue that it has been made aware of. Despite what its name may imply, a PE is a substantial undertaking by the agency and indicates that NHTSA has identified a potential problem — often based on Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs), which are complaints submitted to the agency. A PE often includes extensive fact-finding and requests for information from the affected manufacturer.
• Four Engineering Analyses (EAs) were opened during this period. An EA is a level up from a PE. An EA is opened when NHTSA has determined that there may be a serious safety issue that requires a recall, and is normally an even more comprehensive and in-depth inquiry than a PE. Most, but not all, EAs are escalations of existing PEs that were opened previously. That is the case for three of the four EAs opened from March through November of this year. The fourth — involving highly publicized reports of imported counterfeit air bags that ruptured during deployment, causing multiple deaths — was opened in the first instance as an EA.
• Four Recall Queries and one Audit Query were opened. A Recall Query addresses a recall that a manufacturer has already initiated when NHTSA has reason to believe the remedy was inadequate to address the original issue. An Audit Query likewise addresses a recall whose remedy was allegedly inadequate.

• Finally, two other types of investigations were opened:

• One investigation addresses an alleged failure to comply with NHTSA Standing General Order 2021-01, which requires reporting of crashes involving autonomous vehicle operations.
• NHTSA opened one matter in response to a formal Defect Petition submitted by a member of the public. When it receives a Defect Petition, NHTSA is required by law to evaluate it and determine whether to grant the petition and find that the vehicle in question had a safety defect. Most of the time, NHTSA finds no defect in response to defect petitions.

These figures do not include investigations that were begun during the previous administration and have continued into the current one. Some existing, and high-profile, investigations have been expanded in recent months.

The opened investigations cover a range of potential safety issues. Three of them — two PEs and the Standing General Order investigation — involve autonomous operations. The rest cover everything from inadvertent airbag deployment to braking issues to the sudden loss of motive power to inaccurate seat belt warnings.

Policy Shifts in the Department of Transportation

In some ways, the continuation of safety investigations is not surprising. NHTSA, like every federal agency, is ultimately under the control of its politically appointed leadership, which signs off on new enforcement actions. But the career professionals in the Office of Defects Investigation, which is part of NHTSA’s Enforcement Division, handle investigations day to day and typically drive the initiation of matters.

NHTSA has not, since the start of the administration, announced any significant shifts in its safety enforcement or investigations policy.  This is a stark difference from other policy changes both within NHTSA, as well as the broader Department of Transportation.  For example, NHTSA has proposed major shifts in fuel economy standards (currently subject to litigation), has delayed the implementation of some new safety regulations and guidelines, made various announcements regarding autonomous vehicles, and proposed numerous deregulatory actions.  Likewise, other components of the department have focused their investigative energies on non-U.S. native truckers, announced an overhaul of the air traffic control system, pulled back rules on airline fees and accessibility, and reportedly are planning to drastically reduce spending on public transit.

But no changes in policy have been announced when it comes to auto safety investigations. Moreover, during his confirmation hearing, now-Secretary Duffy confirmed that he did not plan to shut down pending, highly visible auto safety investigations.

Takeaways

• NHTSA’s safety investigations are still open for business. Whatever may happen in rulemaking, fuel economy, or other areas, the agency’s enforcement practices remain vigorous. OEMs, suppliers, and other regulated companies should remain vigilant about the possibility of enforcement action.
• Any subject company on the receiving end of an investigation should take it as seriously as ever. That includes effective engagement with the agency, a thoughtful and coordinated response to any queries, a rigorous internal examination of the facts that gave rise to the investigation, and where appropriate a consideration of the company’s compliance and quality control practices.
• Investigators are continuing to pay particular attention to autonomous operations. One PE for an autonomous operator was opened based solely on a media report, even though there had been no crash and no complaints to the agency.
• Bread-and-butter investigations involving older safety technologies are still active as well. Any company that learns of an issue with its vehicles should consider its options and its legal obligations — ideally before regulators force its hand.

This post is as of the posting date stated above. Sidley Austin LLP assumes no duty to update this post or post about any subsequent developments having a bearing on this post.