Fact check: Fact check Leno's smog exemption law is no more

1. Summary of the results

The claim that Leno's smog exemption law is no more appears to be supported by multiple sources, including ^[1], which confirms that California lawmakers rejected Senate Bill 712, and ^[2], which states that the Assembly Appropriations Committee killed 'Leno's Law' ^{[1] [2]}. Additionally, ^[2] directly supports the claim, stating that the Assembly Appropriations Committee killed the bill, which aimed to exempt classic car owners from smog requirements ^[2]. However, it is essential to consider the context and amendments made to the bill, as mentioned in ^[3], which explains that the amendments made smog exemption more difficult to achieve, ultimately leading to its rejection ^[3]. Key points to note are the rejection of Senate Bill 712 and the killing of 'Leno's Law', which suggest that the smog exemption law is indeed no more.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Some sources provide additional context and alternative viewpoints, such as ^[4], which discusses the introduction of California Senate Bill 712, also known as 'Leno's Law', and its aim to exempt classic cars 35 years or older from smog tests ^[4]. Furthermore, ^[5] provides an update on 'Leno's Law', stating that the bill has been amended to remove the requirement for collector cars to have collector-car insurance to be exempt from smog rules ^[5]. Alternative viewpoints and benefits of the bill are highlighted in ^[6], which quotes Jay Leno and Mike Spagnola, CEO of SEMA, in support of the bill and its potential benefits for enthusiasts and the industry ^[6]. Missing context includes the potential benefits of the bill for classic car owners and the industry, as well as the amendments made to the bill, which may have contributed to its rejection. Some sources, such as ^[7], do not provide direct confirmation or denial of the current status of Leno's smog exemption law, and ^[8] does not provide any relevant information, as it appears to be an error message ^{[7] [8]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement may be considered accurate, as multiple sources confirm that Leno's smog exemption law is no more ^{[1] [2]}. However, potential bias may exist in the presentation of the information, as some sources may have a vested interest in the outcome of the bill, such as classic car owners and the specialty automotive industry ^{[4] [5] [6]}. Jay Leno and the classic car community may benefit from the bill, and their support for the bill may be driven by a desire to reduce regulatory burdens and promote the industry ^{[4] [6]}. On the other hand, environmental groups and lawmakers may benefit from the rejection of the bill, as it may be seen as a way to maintain or strengthen emissions regulations and reduce air pollution ^{[1] [2]}. It is essential to consider multiple sources and viewpoints to form a comprehensive understanding of the issue and to avoid potential misinformation or bias ^{[1] [2] [3] [7] [4] [5] [6]}.