For us, we wanted a vehicle that could tow a Camper Trailer, and one that could hold my daughter’s wheelchair easily, as well as her friends. A minivan would have fulfilled the wheelchair requirement, but it’s my wife’s dream vehicle, and I really want my youngest daughter to get the same camping trip experiences despite having special needs (like water and a sterile environment to wash up and catheter her, so a camper is a necessity if we want to “camp”).
Something like the Cybertruck wasn’t even a consideration, because it can haul maybe 90 miles for a camper trailer, based on what I’ve seen in testing.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40699325
This isn't a diamond ring situation where someone created demand out of nothing.
So what are we to conclude? Yes, the majority of US car buyers will literally buy the biggest gas guzzling pollution spewer they can afford. Call it revealed preferences, although it's hardly obscured - hell, a large number of people vote on the premise that gas must be $5 forever.
This would be a sufficient explanation if and only if SUVs were cheaper than trucks. They're not, so the rising popularity of SUVs cannot be because skirting emissions regulations allowed selling a cheaper gas guzzler.
(This is aside from the fact that is referenced by another comment further up [0] that most modern SUVs aren't actually significantly less fuel efficient than traditional vehicles.)
Skirting emissions laws only works as a complete explanation if it can account for consumer behavior.
My sense from talking to people who own them is that they chose them because they could function as a truck or as a minivan depending on what they need to do at the time, without having to own both. That's a much less exciting explanation than yours, but it does account for both consumer behavior and manufacturer behavior. Emissions laws may very well have increased manufacturer margins on these vehicles, but they're filling a real need in people's lives.