|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
BOSTON — Massachusetts is suing the Trump administration over what it calls an “unlawful attempt” to freeze offshore wind development — an energy source the commonwealth is relying on to meet growing grid demand and decarbonization goals.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell and the top law enforcement officials from more than a dozen states say a presidential memorandum against wind energy projects stymies domestic investment, will jeopardize states’ abilities to supply enough electricity, and has created an “existential threat” to the industry.
Campbell filed the lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court with 17 other attorneys general in states that already have offshore or land-based wind projects, or plan to develop them. They are asking a federal judge to rule that President Donald Trump’s directive is illegal, and prevent the administration from taking any action to delay or prevent wind energy development.
“Massachusetts has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into offshore wind to ensure our residents have access to well-paying green jobs and reliable, affordable energy that helps meet our clean energy and climate goals,” said Campbell in a statement Monday. “The President’s attempts to stop homegrown wind energy development directly contradict his claims that there is a growing need for reliable domestic energy.”
The legal challenge comes after Trump, on his first day in office, issued a memorandum barring further leasing and permitting of offshore wind projects, and ordering a review of federal permitting practices across all projects. There is no timeline for this review, effectively making the freeze indefinite. Already permitted projects also face a review of their leases.
On April 16, the Interior Department, citing the presidential memorandum, issued a stop-work order to a wind project off the New York coast, Empire Wind 1, even though it’s fully permitted and approved. Empire Wind 1’s developer was moving rocks on the seafloor to create stable bases for turbine foundations, and was set to begin pile driving turbine foundations this month.
The move put an even greater chill on the energy sector, including in Massachusetts, where Vineyard Wind remains under construction as opponents continue to call for its shutdown.
The complaint
The attorneys general in a 100-page complaint allege that Trump’s directive harms their states’ efforts to secure new sources of energy to meet increasing demand for electricity (which experts say is rapidly rising), reduce emissions, and address climate change.
They also argue that the abrupt halt on all permitting violates numerous federal laws that prescribe procedures and timelines for how federal agencies may develop and issue regulations.
Trump’s order directs the secretary of the interior to “conduct a comprehensive review of the ecological, economic, and environmental necessity of terminating or amending any existing wind energy leases, identifying any legal bases for such removal, and submit a report with recommendations to the President.”
It cites environmental and economic concerns, highlighting the commercial fishing industry, birds and marine mammals, and alleges deficiencies in the permitting and review process.
However, while the federal government has criticized the permitting process for wind energy, it is working to fast-track permitting reviews for other energy sectors. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum posted on X (formerly Twitter) last week about reducing 2-year permitting reviews for drilling and mining to 28 days, and 1-year reviews to 14 days.
“These and numerous other executive actions similarly encouraged domestic energy development — that is, all but wind and other renewable energy — and also directed agencies to shortcut environmental reviews for other forms of energy — the very same reviews the Wind Directive labels as inadequate as to wind energy,” the complaint reads.
Per the federal government’s permitting dashboard, the agency reviews for Massachusetts wind projects have lasted two or three years for a given permit. Altogether, the time from lease sale to project construction can last about 10 years.
The attorneys general also argue the memorandum threatens investment by wind developers in local workforce and supply chains, which they say has totaled billions of dollars to date.
According to the Massachusetts AG’s office, the state has invested more than $330 million in offshore wind through workforce development, research and infrastructure.
In New Bedford, the 62-turbine Vineyard Wind project has employed nearly 2,900 people at various lengths of time as of last fall, including union workers, and has helped commercial fishermen supplement their income with safety vessel work.
Without certainty and predictable federal processes, experts say, not just the wind industry, but other industries, are likely to pull back from investment in the U.S.
Trump’s nominee for assistant interior secretary, Leslie Beyer, conceded this last week during her Senate confirmation hearing, agreeing with Sen. Angus King (D-Maine) that the Empire Wind stop-work order sends a “dangerous message” to energy developers, ReNews and other outlets reported.
“Wind energy is a domestic source of reliable, affordable energy that supports hundreds of thousands of jobs, creates billions of dollars in economic activity and tax payments, and supplies more than 10% of the country’s electricity,” Campbell’s office stated.
Her office also warned of impacts a long-term freeze could have on ratepayers. A 2024 study from ISO New England, the operator of the regional power grid, states that without offshore wind, the cost of energy for New England customers is expected to increase by about 50% in 2050.
What’s at stake
Massachusetts is counting on offshore wind to meet projected grid demand and its climate goals of achieving net-zero emissions (meaning the state offsets or removes as much carbon as it emits) by 2050.
The state has three offshore wind projects in various stages of development: Vineyard Wind 1, SouthCoast Wind and New England Wind. Together, they would produce 3.1 gigawatts of energy, or enough to power up to 1.4 million homes.
Vineyard Wind 1 has installed 32 turbine towers, some without blades, as of mid-April. Because of the blade failure in summer 2024, the developer is removing blades from 22 turbines and replacing them with new ones. The project briefly delivered power for a few months in 2024, and resumed sending power in January 2025 with only one turbine.
New England Wind, an Avangrid project, is fully permitted and previously expected commercial operations by 2029, but SouthCoast Wind still requires a key permit from NOAA Fisheries. Both projects plan to use union labor and the Port of New Bedford for long-term operations and maintenance, or offshore construction and staging.
Avangrid also plans to open a manufacturing plant in New Bedford — but it’s contingent on the project getting built.
The state is still finalizing agreements to purchase power from SouthCoast Wind and New England Wind. The process was set to finalize in March, but it was delayed in large part due to uncertainty created by federal actions.
The American Clean Power Association (ACP) commended the states’ action.
“With energy demand surging nationwide, it’s no surprise that states are actively working to ensure federal actions support, rather than hinder, reliable power generation,” said ACP spokesperson Jason Ryan in an email. “A balanced, all-of-the-above energy strategy is essential to meeting consumer needs. ACP is working with the administration to clarify the scope and intent of the Executive Orders related to wind energy development.”
New Bedford Mayor Jon Mitchell, a longtime proponent of offshore wind development, said his position remains that “appropriately sited offshore wind projects can succeed without harming the fishing industry.”
“While some sites may require additional scrutiny, projects slated for the Massachusetts Wind Energy areas should be allowed to proceed as their imposition on the fishing industry is not significant,” Mitchell said in a statement.
Attorneys general from the following states have joined Massachusetts in challenging the Trump administration’s targeting of wind energy: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington. The District of Columbia is also a party to the suit.
“My colleagues and I will continue to challenge this administration’s unlawful actions to chill investment and growth of this critical industry,” Campbell said on Monday.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, NOAA Fisheries and the Department of Commerce are also named defendants. Per an AG spokesperson, the plaintiffs are awaiting the scheduling of a hearing date. The federal government must respond within 21 days of being served with the complaint.
Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV has been assigned to the case, court filings show. He was nominated by George W. Bush in 2003, and became chief judge of the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts in 2020.
Taylor Rogers, White House assistant press secretary, in an email about the lawsuit, said the Democrat-led states are using “lawfare.”
“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,” Rogers said. “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.”
A spokesperson for the Interior Department on Monday said as a matter of policy, the agency does not comment on litigation.
“The Department of the Interior reaffirms its unwavering commitment to conserving and managing the nation’s natural and cultural resources, upholding tribal trust responsibilities, and overseeing public lands and waters for the benefit of all Americans, while prioritizing fiscal responsibility for the American people,” said J. Elizabeth Peace in an email.
The Interior Department has not provided information on the timeline of its mandated review of projects, or further details on its stop-work order for Empire Wind. When asked what information Interior obtained that “raises serious issues” regarding the Empire Wind project approval, Peace deferred to NOAA Fisheries.
NOAA Fisheries has not responded to repeated questions on the subject.
“It doesn’t seem to be something that’s being done in a public manner at all,” said Brian Krevor, director of offshore permitting for industry group, ACP, at a wind industry conference last week on a panel about Trump’s memorandum. (Krevor previously worked at BOEM for more than a decade.)
“You hear something about an agency sending something that highlights deficiencies and you may never see what that is,” he said. “You would assume at some point they would have to release something, but there’s really no timeline for that… It just seems to be something that’s being done in the shadows.”
Email Anastasia E. Lennon at alennon@newbedfordlight.org.
Editor’s note: This story was modified on Wednesday, May 7, 2025, to note that a $330 million investment is by the state, through MassCEC, not wind developers.
NOAA fisheries staff positions have been slashed by the current administration. Maybe that would explain the lack of response from NOAA fisheries about objections to permits for South Coast Wind. They are also among the many agencies being sued by the current administration. Maybe the limited staff that remains at NOAA is coping with that extra obstacle to clean energy. Meanwhile, the current administration wants to remove obstacles to energy sources that pollute. Hmmmm… Could this be all about the money flowing into this administration from the fossil fuel industry, one might ask??? Just another example where agencies that protect and serve the public good are being dismantled. Civil service positions are being eliminated resulting in public access being increasingly limited, if not removed altogether.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/05/climate/lawsuit-wind-power-halt-trump-energy-emergency.html
Wind will only cost the consumer more money while Solar will always be the way to go.