HOLLIDAYSBURG, Pa. — Luigi Mangione, charged in the early December murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, could be back in New York sooner rather than later.

An attorney for Mangione told CBS News New York on Wednesday he will waive extradition at his hearing in Pennsylvania on Thursday morning. That could put the suspect in front of a New York City judge for an arraignment on murder charges within hours.

“If he waives extradition, that should be quite quick,” said Anna Cominsky, a professor at New York Law School. “The idea is we want to be able to get him over here to answer the charges that are pending here in New York, so in a matter of a day or two at most.”

Cominsky was asked what the benefit would be of Mangione waiving extradition on Thursday.

“The benefit is he gets his New York case to start. We already know that Pennsylvania has said they are not going to move forward with their case until the New York case is completed, and so this means that once he’s here, he can actually be arraigned and the case can begin with respect to his New York charges,” she said.

If for some reason Mangione ends up contesting his extradition, a spokesman said New York Gov. Kathy Hochul will quickly sign a special warrant that could get him back to New York City in a matter of days or weeks.

CBS News New York has learned new details about Mangione’s communication in the Pennsylvania prison where he’s being held. The 26-year-old suspect has received 40 emails and 53 pieces of mail since his arrest last week at an Altoona McDonald’s, and has had 158 deposits into his commissary account. He has also had three visitors. Not from family, but rather his three attorneys, including Manhattan prosecutor-turned-defense attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo.

Luigi Mangione indicted on murder, terrorism charges

Mangione was indicted Tuesday on 11 charges, including first-degree murder in furtherance of terrorism, in the brazen assassination of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson earlier this month. 

“This was a killing that, it was intended to evoke terror, and we’ve seen that reaction,” Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg announced Tuesday. 

“This was a frightening, well-planned, targeted murder that was intended to cause shock, attention and intimidation,” Bragg continued. “It occurred in one of the most bustling parts of our city, threatening the safety of local residents and tourists alike, commuters and business people just starting out on their day.”  

The indictment also confirmed the words “deny” and “depose” were written on shell casings found at the scene, and “delay” was written on one of the bullets, an apparent nod to the “three Ds of insurance,” a phase used by critics of the industry.   

“We really need to see more, with respect to why is it that the prosecutor believes that they have evidence that supports that terrorism charge. Why is it that they believe that it wasn’t just an intent to kill an individual but also to terrorize others, to put fear in others, which is required in order to substantiate that,” Cominsky said.

“We don’t celebrate murders”

The NYPD flagged what appears to be a wave of online support for Mangione from people expressing anger toward the health care industry, along with serious online threats since Thompson’s murder. 

“There is no heroism in what Mangione did. This was a senseless act of violence, it was a cold and calculated crime that stole a life and put New Yorkers at risk,” NYPD Commissioner Jessica Tisch said.  

“We don’t celebrate murders and we don’t lionize the killing of anyone, and any attempt to rationalize this is vile, reckless and offensive to our deeply held principles of justice,” Tisch added.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday granted California its request to enforce vehicle emissions standards stricter than federal rules, including the state’s ban on sales of new gasoline-powered cars.

The EPA granted two waivers to the California Air Resources Board to allow full implementation of its regulation requiring all new car sales to be zero-emission by 2035 and a second rule lowering emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks and off-road vehicles.

The stricter rules would also set interim quotas for zero-emission vehicles. Starting with 2026 models, 35% of new cars, SUVs and small pickups sold in California would be required to be zero-emission vehicles, with quotas increasing each year until 2035. 

The quotas would allow 20% of zero-emission cars sold to be plug-in hybrids. The rules would not affect used vehicles, allowing gas-powered car and trucks to remain on the roads.

Other states that have followed California’s lead on stricter emissions rules are weighing whether or not to also adopt the ban on gas cars.

Trump administration seeks to block California rules

California’s strict emission rules will likely see an immediate challenge from the incoming administration. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to bar the state from setting its own rules on emissions, which his first administration did in 2019 by revoking the state’s EPA waiver. The move prompted California and 22 other states to sue the administration, a lawsuit that became moot when President Joe Biden took office and reversed the Trump administration policy. 

“Clean cars are here to stay. The Biden-Harris Administration reaffirmed what we’ve known for decades — California can rise to the challenge of protecting our people by cleaning our air and cutting pollution,” said California Gov. Gavin Newsom in a prepared statement. “Naysayers like President-elect Trump would prefer to side with the oil industry over consumers and American automakers, but California will continue fostering new innovations in the market.”

Last month, Newsom announced the state would renew a rebate program for electric vehicles if the incoming Trump administration follows through on its threat to eliminate the federal tax credit of $7,500.

Efforts by the incoming administration to block California’s emissions standards will likely prompt a series of legal challenges that could delay any action.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a narrow case on whether the oil and gas industry has the standing to sue California over its tailpipe emission standards.

California’s battle to cut pollution levels

In granting California the waiver requests, the EPA said its review found that opponents did not meet the burden to show how either program is inconsistent with the federal Clean Air Act.

“California has longstanding authority to request waivers from EPA to protect its residents from dangerous air pollution coming from mobile sources like cars and trucks,” said EPA Administrator Michael S. Regan in a statement. “Today’s actions follow through on EPA’s commitment to partner with states to reduce emissions and act on the threat of climate change.”

California established the country’s first tailpipe emissions standards in 1966 and is the only state eligible for a waiver to the federal Clean Air Act of 1970, giving the EPA the authority to regulate pollution nationwide. The Clean Air Act also allows other states to adopt California’s standards. Since the Clean Air Act was established, the EPA has granted California more than 75 waivers for its vehicle emissions program. 

Major automakers such as BMW, Ford, Honda, Stellantis and Volkswagen have adopted California’s current emission rules. Newsom said in a press release Wednesday that millions of Californians and other Americans have already switched to clean vehicles and more than two million zero-emission vehicles have been sold in the state.

Industry group Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which has consistently spoken out against California’s stricter emission rules, said Wednesday it expects President-elect Trump to revoke the waiver in 2025.

“We’ve said the country should have a single, national standard to reduce carbon in transportation, but the question about the general authority of California to establish a vehicle emissions program – and for other states to follow that program – is ultimately something for policymakers and the courts to sort out,” the group said in a press release.  

Environmental groups hail EPA decision on California emissions

The advocacy group Earthjustice said the EPA’s decision would mean cars in the state would largely be zero-emission by the 2050s and the rule on heavy-duty truck emissions would “deliver critical health benefits to people affected by the worst polluters on the roads: large diesel trucks.”

“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” said Earthjustice director of Right To Zero campaign Part Cort in a press release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog.”

The National Resources Defense Council said in a press release that Congress has long recognized the state’s ability to set stronger emissions standards which has help California spur innovation and save lives.

“These waivers allow California – and states that chose to align with it – to curb the pollution spewing from tailpipes and address the impacts of the climate crisis,” said NRDC director of clean vehicles Kathy Harris. “California decided that transitioning to cleaner and zero-emission vehicles is the best way to address the unique burdens it faces. This is exactly how our system of federalism should work. If other states don’t like California’s approach, they don’t need to follow it. But no one should object to the longstanding authority of states to act to protect their residents.”