Democrat-Led States Sue Trump Admin Over Wind Energy Project Freeze
A coalition of 18 Democratic-led states filed suit on Monday challenging President Donald Trump's nationwide suspension of wind energy project approvals, calling it an unlawful and politically motivated blockade that threatens job growth, energy security, and 'climate progress.'
The lawsuit,
Trump's directive cites a range of concerns, including potential impacts on marine ecosystems, navigational safety, national defense operations, and what it suggested were destabilizing effects of intermittent wind generation on grid reliability and energy prices.
'We're not going to do the wind thing,' Trump said on Jan. 20 after returning to the Oval Office for a second term.
'So if you're into whales, you don't want windmills either, and they're the most expensive form of energy that you can have by far. They're all made in China, by the way, practically all of them. They kill your birds and they ruin your beautiful landscapes.'
According to the complaint, the move has stalled dozens of wind energy projects and forced at least one federally approved offshore development near New York to halt construction.
Related Stories
5/2/2025
5/1/2025
James and her co-plaintiffs argued in the lawsuit and a
'This administration is devastating one of our nation's fastest-growing sources of clean, reliable, and affordable energy,' James said in a statement. 'This arbitrary and unnecessary directive threatens the loss of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions in investments, and it is delaying our transition away from the fossil fuels that harm our health and our planet.'
The lawsuit contends that Trump's directive violates the Administrative Procedure Act and exceeds presidential authority by imposing a blanket freeze without statutory justification or due process. The plaintiffs are seeking a preliminary injunction to immediately restart the permitting process while litigation proceeds.
The coalition said in a press release that the halt undermines states' ability to meet clean energy mandates and rising electricity demands.
New York, for instance, is legally required to generate 70 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2030 and 100 percent by 2040 under its Climate Law, they noted, adding that the state's wind sector currently supports over 4,400 jobs and is projected to create 18,000 more in the next decade.
'Those jobs will not materialize if these projects are halted,' James and the co-plaintiffs stated in the press release. 'The administration's indefinite blockade could leave billions of dollars in states' clean energy investments stranded or underutilized and significantly harm their economic development.'
Besides New York, the other plaintiffs in the case are attorneys general from Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia.
The White House dismissed the lawsuit as a politically motivated effort to block the president's agenda to reassert 'America's energy dominance.'
'Instead of working with President Trump to unleash American energy and lower prices for American families, Democrat Attorneys General are using lawfare to stop the President's popular energy agenda,' Taylor Rogers, White House assistant press secretary, told The Epoch Times in an emailed statement. 'The American people voted for the President to restore America's energy dominance, and Americans in blue states should not have to pay the price of the Democrats' radical climate agenda.'
Trump's Jan. 20 directive also ordered a government-wide review of all existing wind leases, including the condition and safety of idle turbines, and instructed federal agencies to evaluate whether defunct projects should be dismantled. It was issued alongside a series of executive actions aimed at fast-tracking domestic oil, gas, and mineral extraction and repealing Biden-era climate regulations.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
28 minutes ago
- Politico
Supreme Court limits outside access to DOGE records
The Supreme Court has reined in a lower-court order that allowed a watchdog group wide-ranging access to records of the Trump administration's Department of Government Efficiency. The high court's majority said a judge's directive allowing Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to examine DOGE's recommendations for cost savings at executive branch agencies was 'not appropriately tailored.' In a two-page order Friday, the Supreme Court said such access was not a proper way to resolve an ongoing dispute about whether DOGE is a federal agency subject to the Freedom of Information Act or operates as a presidential advisory body that does not have to share its records with the public. 'Separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal Executive Branch communications,' the court's majority wrote. All three of the court's liberal justices indicated they disagreed with the decision, but none provided an explanation of her views.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration to pay nearly $5M in wrongful death lawsuit of Jan. 6 rioter shot by police
The Trump administration will pay a $4.975 million settlement in the lawsuit over the wrongful death of Ashli Babbitt, who was killed by a U.S. Capitol Police officer after storming the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. Babbitt — a 35-year-old from California and veteran of the Air Force who went to Washington for President Donald Trump's rally — was among an early group of rioters that reached the doors of the Speaker's Lobby, adjacent to the House chamber, while lawmakers were still evacuating. Details of the settlement were released by Judicial Watch, a pro-Trump advocacy group that represented her estate and family members in the lawsuit. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to request to comment. The settlement is likely to inflame tensions on Capitol Hill over the riot. Outgoing Capitol Police chief Thomas Manger blasted the reported settlement last month, saying it 'sends a chilling message to law enforcement nationwide, especially to those with a protective mission like ours.' As members of the mob standing near Babbitt pounded on the doors and cracked glass window panes, outnumbered police officers stepped aside and ceded the hallway to the rioters. Moments later, Babbitt is seen on video attempting to enter the lobby through a shattered window. That's when Capitol Police officer Michael Byrd fired the fatal shot. Byrd was investigated and cleared by local and federal authorities. Babbitt was the only rioter killed by police, but several others died either during or in the hours immediately after the protest. Over 100 Capitol Police officers were injured during the protest. The lawsuit was filed in California by Babbitt's family in 2024, claiming wrongful death, assault and battery, as well as negligence claims. The lawsuit was set to go to trial in 2026, but both parties agreed to the settlement. A joint filing Friday from government attorneys and Babbitt's acknowledged that a settlement was reached, but did not disclose details. 'This fair settlement is a historic and necessary step for justice for Ashli Babbitt's family. Ashli should never have been killed, and this settlement destroys the evil, partisan narrative that justified her outrageous killing and protected her killer,' said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton in a press release on the settlement. Trump has repeatedly praised Babbitt, portraying her as an innocent patriot and decrying her death at the hands of Capitol police. It's part of the Trump administration's efforts to repaint the protest on Jan. 6 as a day of patriotism and freedom of expression, rather than an unprecedented insurrection widely denounced in 2021 by Republicans and Democrats. Trump issued sweeping pardons for nearly all of those charged or under investigation for their actions on Jan. 6, including over 300 charged with assaulting the police. Numerous Jan. 6 rioters have been arrested on unrelated charges since. Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Democratic congressman steps up his work to pull Musk toward his party
Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., talked with one of Elon Musk's 'senior confidants' on Thursday about whether the ex-DOGE leader, now feuding with Donald Trump, might want to help the Democratic Party in the midterms. 'Having Elon speak out against the irrational tariff policy, against the deficit exploding Trump bill, and the anti-science and anti-immigrant agenda can help check Trump's unconstitutional administration,' Khanna told Semafor on Friday. 'I look forward to Elon turning his fire against MAGA Republicans instead of Democrats in 2026.' Khanna, who has known Musk for more than a decade, has long argued that Democrats unwisely pushed him away from their party. Now the world's wealthiest man, Musk benefited from the Obama administration's clean energy investments, defending them against Republican attacks in the 2012 election. He supported Democratic nominees for president until 2024, when he endorsed Trump for president — and spent more to help elect him than he had for any Democrat. Since Musk began attacking the Trump-backed GOP tax bill as an 'abomination' this week, Democrats in Congress have amplified his criticism and even adopted some of his language. But few besides Khanna have gone as far as talking about bringing Musk back into the Democratic tent; most Democrats are furious at Musk's DOGE work to dismantle parts of the federal government and are confident that he is a political liability for Trump. 'How great is it that that dipshit Elon Musk is out?' Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota said at last Friday's Democratic fish fry in South Carolina, after Musk left the administration. 'The decisions he was making were literally killing people, so he could dance around and act like he was doing something.' Musk was a 'historic villain' whose unpopularity had helped Wisconsin Democrats win the state's April 1 supreme court race by 10 points, said state Democratic Party chairman Ben Wikler. At their 'Fighting Oligarchy' rallies, the largest political events since Trump was sworn in, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., torched Musk as the embodiment of what Democrats and fair-minded Americans should be against. Some Democrats believe that Musk could have stayed in their coalition, had they paid him a little more respect — specifically, had Joe Biden invited Musk to the White House electric vehicle summit early in his presidency. Khanna is in that camp. Others counter that the party's overall shift leftward after 2016 alienated Musk, who was never coming back. He clashed with Elizabeth Warren ('Senator Karen') over the idea of a wealth tax, and with progressives over the 'woke mind virus' that he blamed for the gender transition of his third child. That's the camp where most Democrats are, although some — like Walz — see this as a political opportunity. Still, the idea of an irate multibillionaire making problems for Republicans is enticing to plenty of Democrats, who have not been above meddling in GOP primaries to help weaker candidates win nominations. What if Musk made Republicans burn money to defend their incumbents, as he slammed them with TV ads? That's all theoretical, as Musk said last month that he would do 'a lot less' political spending now that he'd achieved his goal of electing Trump. If Musk is sincere about the political views he posts about on X, he is completely at odds with the Democratic Party, and the best they could hope for is him making trouble for Republicans out of spite. In Politico, Holly Otterbein and Lisa Kashinsky about the Democrats who hoped that Musk would have a 'villain-to-hero' arc, and help them beat Trump. But Khanna was the only voice in the party who fully believed it could happen.
