Facing the threat of a critical market shutdown, Tesla needs to prove that it has not overly hyped its autonomous driving capabilities.

Cailian Press, July 22nd (Editor: Shi Zhengcheng) – Starting from Monday, the American electric vehicle giant Tesla will engage in a five-day court battle with the California Department of Motor Vehicles, arguing whether the publicly listed company has overstated the capabilities of its Autopilot and FSD (Full Self-Driving) autonomous driving technology and misled consumers.
As a result of this confrontation, the court will determine whether to approve the request by the California government – to suspend Tesla’s manufacturer and dealer licenses for at least 30 days and impose fines.
Considering that the tax credit for electric vehicles in the United States is set to expire at the end of September, some demand for purchases at the end of the year will be released in the third quarter. California, not only accounting for one-third of the country’s electric vehicle sales but also being Tesla’s largest market in the US, faces a significant challenge if Tesla loses the court case. The already troubled performance for 2025 would be further compounded.
It is reported that California regulators have stated that Tesla made “false or misleading” statements about its vehicles equipped with advanced driver assistance systems in 2021 and 2022, including describing these features as capable of completing short and long journeys without any action from the driver, violating state law.
The amended complaint filed by the California Department of Motor Vehicles in November 2023 states that Tesla’s vehicles equipped with driver assistance systems could not operate as autonomous vehicles at the time of release and still cannot do so now.
In response, Tesla stated in February 2024 that the marketing documents cited by the California motor regulatory agency were “misleading,” failing to consider the warnings and documentation issued by the company regarding the system. Tesla emphasized, “The company repeatedly and explicitly stated that its vehicles are not autonomous and require continuous monitoring by the driver.”
Tesla also argued that given that California regulators had been aware of Tesla’s use of the “Autopilot” (literally meaning “autonomous driving assistance”) and FSD (Full Self-Driving) brands since 2014 and 2016, it should be considered as implied consent from the regulatory authorities to allow the company to continue using these brands.
However, this argument did not persuade the court, leading to the case entering trial last year.
Aside from the case in California, Tesla is also facing a jury trial in Florida, involving a Model S driver who was distracted and caused the death of a pedestrian in 2019. The focus of the trial is whether this accident can be partially attributed to Tesla’s Autopilot.
The marketing issues raised in this case were also mentioned. The company’s lawyers insisted that Musk and Tesla’s statements about their vehicles being self-driving were forward-looking and did not reflect current technological levels.