Eighteen Democratic attorneys general filed a lawsuit on Monday challenging President Donald Trump’s executive order restricting wind projects as a part of the U.S. energy infrastructure.

New York Attorney General Letitia James led a coalition of Democrats from 17 states and Washington, D.C., alleging that a memorandum Trump issued during his first day in office to halt wind projects on federal lands is unlawful. The order temporarily blocked all lease sales for offshore wind projects and paused any new approvals, permits, leases, or loans both on and offshore.

Recommended Stories

• Senate votes to cancel Biden standards on tire manufacturing emissions 
• Oil prices plunge as OPEC+ boosts output again
• Senate overturns Energy Department appliance rules, sending measures to Trump to sign

“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,” James said in a statement.

A New York offshore wind project called Empire Wind, which the Biden administration approved, was rescinded last month by Department of the Interior Secretary Doug Burgum after state Republicans characterized it as “catastrophic,” saying it would “disrupt some of [the] nation’s busiest waters and negatively affect important radar systems.”

James has argued that the wind farm was critical to helping New York comply with a state law mandating it reach 70% renewable energy by 2030 and 100% by 2040.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta claimed Monday that Trump’s move to “illegally” issue guidance undermining wind project development would only raise energy prices. Bonta’s move to join James and other attorneys general in suing over wind projects brings the total number of lawsuits he has filed against the Trump administration to 18.

“Our communities will also suffer the economic consequences of the President’s misguided lawlessness,” he said, adding that five federal offshore wind leases off California’s coast stand to be affected by the memorandum. “The President has promised that his actions would lower energy costs, but instead, energy prices have only gone up and will continue to skyrocket. In California, we will continue to hold the President accountable for breaking the law and protect our significant progress in expanding cleaner, cheaper energy for American families.”  

California, other states named in the lawsuit, and D.C. have collectively poured hundreds of millions of dollars into offshore wind projects viewed as a clean energy solution to combating climate change. The Trump administration has pushed back against such efforts, arguing that wind projects cannot meet the growing demand for energy to the level it believes other alternatives, such as oil, natural gas, nuclear energy, and coal, can. The president believes that developing these alternative forms of energy will result in lower costs for consumers. 

He has also expressed concern that wind projects could upset environmental ecosystems and disrupt the U.S. fishing industry. Those worries were echoed by the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) in a letter to the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement last year. The letter claimed wind farm development had led to “potential negative and adverse impact[s]” on the environment, marine life, and human health. In April, the Government Accountability Office released a report confirming those concerns, noting wind projects had also affected the military’s defense and radar systems, and criticizing the BSEE for how it addressed problems. 

Trump’s January memorandum halted the wind projects as they undergo federal review, which will consider their environmental effect on wildlife and the economic costs associated with the “intermittent generation of electricity and the effect of subsidies on the viability of the wind industry.”

White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers condemned the lawsuit in a statement to the Washington Examiner as Democratic “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,” she 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.”

Some experts have warned that scaling back wind energy development and repealing federal subsidies to the industry could raise residential electricity bills by 7% and business costs by 10% by 2026. Others argue that despite hefty federal subsidies, wind technology may still be incapable of meeting growing energy demand.

The tension between the two sides was apparent during a congressional hearing on the matter last year. 

“If we have 40% to 50% of the time that we can rely upon [offshore wind] energy, some quick math tells us that that means 50% of the time, we cannot rely on that energy,” former Rep. Matt Rosendale told Bureau of Ocean Energy Management Deputy Director Walter Cruickshank during an Energy and Mineral Resources Subcommittee hearing.

Cruikshank replied, “I am not concerned. Offshore wind has a long track record globally. It’s been producing energy for over 30 years and been doing so successfully.”

From 2016 to 2022, the federal government spent about $18.7 billion on wind power subsidies —roughly 2.5 times more than the combined subsidies for coal and refined coal, twice as much as those for natural gas, and about 6.5 times more than subsidies for nuclear energy, according to the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Republicans say Democrats, particularly under the Biden administration, pushed wind projects as part of a liberal climate agenda that didn’t take costs or consumers into question. 

“The current administration wants this no matter how much it takes, how much it costs or how much harm it does,” Rep. Jef Van Drew (R-NJ), who was responsible for drafting Trump’s memorandum slashing wind projects, said of former President Joe Biden and his officials during an event last summer. 

Democrats argue Republicans are being selective regarding which energy sources they critique.

RUNDOWN: TRUMP’S FIRST 100 DAYS FOR THE ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT SECTORS 

“Some of my colleagues don’t seem to care very much about impacts on marine life when we’re talking about offshore oil and gas, only when we’re talking about offshore wind,” Rep. Seth Magaziner (D-RI) said during a congressional hearing in March 2024. 

The coalition of Democratic attorneys general targeting Trump includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Washington, D.C.