Federal Judge Vacates Trump Order Blocking Wind Energy Development, Clearing Way for Projects

A federal judge on Monday vacated President Donald Trump’s Jan. 20 executive order that paused leasing and permitting for wind energy projects, ruling the action was "arbitrary and capricious" and unlawful under U.S. law.

Court Decision and Legal Basis

Judge Patti Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts sided with a coalition of state attorneys general who challenged the administration’s "Day One" order. The coalition argued the president lacked authority to unilaterally halt permitting and leasing for wind projects and that the pause jeopardized state investments, energy planning, public health and climate goals.

The plaintiffs invoked the Administrative Procedure Act, arguing the order did not follow required administrative procedures. An earlier judge in the case allowed claims to proceed against Interior Secretary Doug Burgum while dismissing some claims against President Trump and other Cabinet officials.

Who Challenged the Order

The legal challenge was led by New York Attorney General Letitia James and included attorneys general from 17 states plus Washington, D.C.: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington state. The coalition says those jurisdictions have collectively invested hundreds of millions of dollars in offshore wind development and transmission upgrades to integrate wind power into the grid.

Reactions and Stakes

"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," said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell.

Letitia James said she appreciated the court stepping in "to block the administration’s reckless and unlawful crusade against clean energy," adding that as consumers face rising energy costs, more energy sources—not fewer—are needed.

Advocates emphasized economic and grid reliability stakes: Marguerite Wells, executive director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, called wind "one of the most cost-effective ways to generate power," while Kit Kennedy of the Natural Resources Defense Council described the ruling as a win for consumers, workers, businesses, cleaner air and the climate.

The federal government argued the lawsuit was a policy dispute about energy preferences beyond the scope of federal courts. Justice Department attorney Michael Robertson told the court the order paused permitting while the Interior Department reviewed environmental impacts, rather than permanently stopping projects.

Context

Wind is the largest source of renewable electricity in the United States, generating roughly 10% of the nation’s power, according to the American Clean Power Association. The ruling clears the way for projects to be evaluated on their merits, protecting both existing investments and future development plans.

The Interior Department and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment; the White House previously accused Democratic attorneys general of using "lawfare" to impede the administration’s energy agenda.

Note: The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from private foundations; AP retains editorial control of content.