Overview:
- A group of 13 state attorneys general has initiated a lawsuit in the Northern District of California. They are contesting the termination of funding for various energy and infrastructure programs that were set up under the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
- The suit points out that almost $8 billion has been cut from clean energy initiatives, which the Department of Energy (DOE) announced last October. The lawsuit claims that the Trump administration has quietly stopped projects established by significant energy legislation from the previous administration.
- California Attorney General Rob Bonta remarked, “The President is selectively cutting funding that harms hardworking Americans and hinders innovation for political reasons.” The DOE has ended over $1.2 billion in funding for clean energy projects specifically in California.
Insights:
In early October, Russ Vought, Director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, stated on social media that almost $8 billion intended for “Green New Scam funding” meant to support the Left’s climate agenda was being canceled, affecting 16 states, including California and New York.
The DOE explained that grants were dropped because they “did not sufficiently advance national energy needs, lacked economic viability, and wouldn’t provide a good return on taxpayer investment.”
The states argue that these funding cuts are politically motivated. They claim the DOE targeted states where a majority voted for the Democratic nominee for President, leading to increased energy costs and instability in local businesses.
This lawsuit includes several states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Wisconsin. They contend that only Congress holds the authority to decide on funding and manage federal programs, claiming these cuts violate constitutional separation of powers.
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong emphasized, “Congress approved these programs to create jobs, lower utility costs, and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. We’re suing to remind that laws and Congress cannot be neglected.”
The plaintiffs argue that the DOE made a list to eliminate important energy and infrastructure projects funded by the IIJA and IRA.
This legal action follows a similar case from November, where St. Paul, Minnesota, along with an alliance of energy and environmental groups, sued the DOE to restore clean energy grants. They claimed the administration’s conduct violated First Amendment rights by targeting viewpoints and breached the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause.
In November, the DOE stated that the grants were terminated after careful reviews showed they did not meet several key funding standards, such as missed deadlines and project viability.