Federal Judge Amit Mehta ruled Monday that the Trump administration illegally terminated $7.6 billion in clean-energy grants, finding the move was driven by political retribution against states that voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 election.
At a Glance
- The administration canceled projects in 16 states that backed Harris.
- Programs spanned battery plants, hydrogen hubs, grid upgrades, and carbon-capture efforts.
- A second judge, hours later, allowed an offshore wind farm for Rhode Island and Connecticut to resume work.
- Why it matters: The rulings could restore billions in climate aid and set a precedent against using federal funds to punish political opponents.
Monday’s twin court setbacks complicate President Trump’s effort to dismantle U.S. clean-energy programs. The larger decision, a 17-page opinion from Judge Mehta, says the Energy Department violated the Constitution’s equal-protection clause by “purposefully targeting” recipients based on how their states voted.
Projects Cut Across Blue States
The revoked grants supported hundreds of initiatives in:
- California – up to $1.2 billion for a hydrogen hub
- Pacific Northwest – up to $1 billion for a regional hydrogen project
- 14 other states: Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington
All targeted states supported Harris in the 2024 election. Comparable hydrogen projects in Texas and a three-state Appalachian hub serving West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania were spared, according to clean-energy advocates who obtained an internal Energy Department list.
The department had said an internal review concluded the canceled awards “did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs or were not economically viable.” White House budget director Russell Vought framed the terminations on social media: “the Left’s climate agenda is being canceled.”
In court, the administration offered no evidence that the electoral map alignment was coincidental. Judge Mehta wrote that officials “freely admit that they made grant-termination decisions primarily-if not exclusively-based on whether the awardee resided in a state whose citizens voted for President Trump in 2024.”
Constitutional Violation Found
The lawsuit was brought by the city of St. Paul, Minnesota, and a coalition of environmental groups after their grants evaporated. The judge sided with them, holding that penalizing states for their voters’ choice breaches equal-protection guarantees.
“Defendants … offered no explanation for how their purposeful targeting … rationally advances their stated government interest,” Mehta wrote.
Energy Department spokesman Ben Dietderich defended the review process. Officials “stand by our evaluation,” he said, asserting “these awards individually … did not meet the standards necessary to justify the continued spending of taxpayer dollars.” He added, “The American people deserve a government that is accountable and responsible in managing taxpayer funds.”
Offshore Wind Gets Reprieve
Hours before Mehta’s ruling, a different federal judge lifted the administration’s order halting construction of the Revolution Wind project off the coasts of Rhode Island and Connecticut. The facility is a key piece of the region’s plan to supply clean power to both states.
Connecticut and Rhode Island had sued Thursday to restart work. The court’s decision allows installation to proceed while litigation continues, giving the offshore-wind industry at least a temporary win as Trump attempts to shut down such developments.
Plaintiffs Praise Ruling
Environmental Defense Fund general counsel Vickie Patton, whose group joined the suit, said the court “recognized that the Trump Department of Energy vindictively canceled projects … in violation of the bedrock Constitutional guarantee that all people in all states have equal protection under the law.”
Patton argued the cancellations imposed “high costs on the American people who rely on clean affordable energy for their pocketbooks and for healthier lives.”
Anne Evens, CEO of Elevate Energy-one of the organizations that lost funding-said restoring the grants will keep energy affordable and preserve jobs.
“Affordable energy should be a reality for everyone,” Evens said, “and the restoration of these grants is an important step toward making that possible.”
Timeline of Events
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Oct. 1, 2024 | Trump tells One America News he may “cut things that never should have been approved” |
| Post-Inauguration | Energy Department begins reviewing clean-energy awards |
| Last Week | Administration cancels $7.6 billion in grants, targeting 16 Harris-won states |
| Thursday | Connecticut and Rhode Island sue over offshore-wind shutdown |
| Monday Morning | Federal judge allows Revolution Wind work to resume |
| Monday Afternoon | Judge Mehta rules grant terminations unconstitutional |
What’s Next
The Energy Department must now decide whether to appeal. If Mehta’s decision stands, officials will have to reinstate the funding or justify terminations on non-political grounds. Meanwhile, the offshore-wind ruling keeps turbine construction on track, though further court hearings are expected.
For affected states, the judgments offer a pathway to revive stalled projects meant to expand battery manufacturing, deploy low-carbon hydrogen, modernize power grids, and capture industrial carbon emissions. Local leaders say the money is critical for meeting climate targets and securing new manufacturing jobs.
Key Takeaways
- Two separate judges ruled against the Trump administration’s rollback of climate programs in a single day.
- $7.6 billion in canceled grants must be restored unless the government can show a legitimate, non-political reason for termination.
- Political favoritism in federal funding decisions violates constitutional protections, the courts affirmed.
- The decisions could accelerate deployment of hydrogen hubs, offshore wind, and grid upgrades across multiple states.
