Federal Judge Tosses Trump’s Order Halting Wind Energy Projects

U.S. District Judge Patti Saris ruled in favor of a coalition of attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia.

Wind turbines generate power on a farm near Throckmorton, Texas, on Aug. 24, 2018. Nick Oxford/Reuters

A federal judge on Dec. 8 vacated President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order that halted federal permitting and leasing for wind energy projects, saying it violated U.S. law.

U.S. District Judge Patti Saris of the District of Massachusetts ruled in favor of a coalition of state attorneys general from 17 states and the District of Columbia, which argued that federal efforts to halt authorization for wind energy projects violated the Administrative Procedure Act because the agencies failed to provide reasoned explanations for their actions.

Trump’s order directs federal agencies to halt approvals and leasing for all new offshore wind power projects pending a comprehensive review.

In a 47-page ruling, Saris stated that the order’s indefinite suspension of wind energy project authorizations violates a statutory requirement that agencies proceed to conclude matters “within a reasonable time.”

“No permits have [been] issued since the wind order was promulgated, and the agency defendants acknowledge that they will not issue any permits at least until they complete the comprehensive assessment, for which there is no timeline,” the judge stated. “That action is contrary to law.”

The judge also noted that federal agencies failed to provide “a reasoned explanation” for halting wind project authorizations, even as they were carrying out the president’s directive.

“Given that the wind order constitutes a change of course from decades of agencies’ issuing (or denying) permits related to wind energy projects, the agency defendants were required, at minimum, to ‘provide a reasoned explanation for the change’ and to ‘display awareness that (they were) changing position.’ They failed to do so,” Saris stated.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell, part of the coalition in the lawsuit, hailed the ruling as a “critical victory” for the states.

“Massachusetts has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into offshore wind, and today, we successfully protected those important investments from the Trump Administration’s unlawful order,” Campbell said in a statement.

New York Attorney General Letitia James welcomed the ruling and said there is a need to develop more energy sources, including wind energy, amid rising costs.

“I am grateful the court stepped in to block the administration’s reckless and unlawful crusade against clean energy,” she added.

White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers defended Trump’s directive, saying that offshore wind projects were given “unfair, preferential treatment” under the Biden administration while other energy sources faced burdensome regulations.

“President Trump has ended Joe Biden’s war on American energy and unleashed America’s energy dominance to protect our economic and national security,” Rogers said in a statement.

Trump has pushed to increase U.S. use of fuel and coal energy sources in a move to reduce reliance on foreign supply. On July 7, Trump signed an executive order to end federal subsidies for wind and solar energy projects, citing their unreliability and dependence on foreign-controlled supply chains.

The order states that such renewable energy sources are expensive, compromise the nation’s electric grid, and threaten national security. It instructs the Interior Department to review and eliminate regulations that give preferential treatment to wind and solar projects.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.