SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
sierra club
As Trump Doubles Down on Fossil Fuels, Courts Let Offshore Wind Projects Resume Construction
"The unilateral court victories are evidence of what we've known all along—Donald Trump has it out for offshore wind, but we aren’t giving up without a fight," said a Sierra Club senior adviser.
Feb 02, 2026
While President Donald Trump's administration on Monday again made its commitment to planet-wrecking fossil fuels clear, a Republican-appointed judge in Washington, DC dealt yet another blow to the Department of the Interior's attacks on offshore wind power.
US District Judge Royce Lamberth, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, issued a preliminary injunction allowing the developer of the Sunrise Wind project off New York to resume construction during the court battle over the department's legally dubious move to block this and four other wind farms along the East Coast under the guise of national security concerns.
Lamberth previously issued a similar ruling for Revolution Wind off Rhode Island—which, like Sunrise, is a project of the Danish company Ørsted. Other judges did so for Empire Wind off New York, Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind off Virginia, and Vineyard Wind off Massachusetts, meaning Monday's decision was the fifth defeat for the administration.
Ørsted said in a Monday statement that the Sunrise "will resume construction work as soon as possible, with safety as the top priority, to deliver affordable, reliable power to the State of New York." The company also pledged to "determine how it may be possible to work with the US administration to achieve an expeditious and durable resolution."
Welcoming Lamberth's decision as "a big win for New York workers, families, and our future," Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul stressed that "it puts union workers back on the job, keeps billions in private investment in New York, and delivers the clean, reliable power our grid needs, especially as extreme weather becomes more frequent."
Despite the series of defeats, the Big Oil-backed Trump administration intends to keep fighting the projects. As E&E News reported:
White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers reiterated in a response Monday that Trump has been clear that "wind energy is the scam of the century."
"The Trump administration has paused the construction of all large-scale offshore wind projects because our number one priority is to put America First and protect the national security of the American people," Rogers said. "The administration looks forward to ultimate victory on the issue."
The Interior Department said it had no comment at this time due to pending litigation.
Still, advocates for wind energy and other efforts to address the fossil fuel-driven climate emergency are celebrating the courts' consistent rejections of the Trump administration's "abrupt attempt to halt construction on these fully permitted projects," as Hillary Bright, executive director of the pro-wind group Turn Forward, put it Monday.
"Taken together, these five offshore wind projects represent nearly 6 gigawatts of new electricity now under construction along the East Coast, enough power to serve 2.5 million American homes and businesses," she noted. "At a time when electricity demand is rising rapidly and grid reliability is under increasing strain, these projects represent critically needed utility-scale power sources that are making progress toward completion."
"We hope the consistent outcomes in court bode well for the completion of these projects," Bright said. "Energy experts and grid operators alike recognize that offshore wind is a critical reliability resource for densely populated coastal regions, particularly during periods of high demand. Delaying or obstructing these projects only increases the risk of higher costs and greater instability for ratepayers."
"After five rulings and five clear outcomes, it is time to move past litigation-driven uncertainty and allow these projects to finish the job they were approved to do," she argued. "Offshore wind strengthens American energy security, supports domestic manufacturing and construction jobs, and delivers reliable power where it is needed most. We need to leverage this resource, not hold it back."
Sierra Club senior adviser Nancy Pyne similarly said that "the unilateral court victories are evidence of what we've known all along—Donald Trump has it out for offshore wind, but we aren't giving up without a fight. Communities deserve a cleaner, cheaper, healthier future, and offshore wind will help us get there."
"Despite the roadblocks Donald Trump has tried to throw up in an effort to bolster dirty fossil fuels, offshore wind will prevail," she predicted. "We will continue to call for responsible and equitable offshore wind from coast to coast, as we fight for an affordable and reliable clean energy future for all."
Allyson Samuell, a Sierra Club senior campaign representative in the state, highlighted that beyond the climate benefits of the project, "we are glad to see Sunrise Wind's 800 workers, made up largely of local New Yorkers, get back to work."
"Once constructed, Sunrise Wind will supply 600,000 local homes with affordable, reliable, renewable energy—this power is super needed and especially important during extreme cold snaps and winter storms like Storm Fern," Samuell said in the wake of the dangerous weather. "Here in New York, South Fork has proven offshore wind works, now is the time to see Sunrise, and Empire Wind, come online too."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Victory for Everyone Who Pays an Electricity Bill': Judge Tosses Trump Ban on New Wind Energy Projects
"Get out of the way of the expansion of renewable energy," one clean power advocate told the Trump administration.
Dec 09, 2025
Clean energy advocates have scored at least a temporary victory after a federal judge on Monday threw out President Donald Trump's executive order that banned new wind power projects in the US.
As reported by CNBC, Judge Patti Saris of the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts tossed Trump's executive order in its entirety after finding it "arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law," and arguing that the federal government did not provide a reasoned explanation for enacting such a policy.
The executive order, which Trump signed in January, halted all permits and leases for both offshore and onshore wind power projects.
A group of 17 states, led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, sued the Trump administration earlier this year to overturn the executive order, which they labeled "an existential threat to the wind industry" in the US.
In a social media post, James hailed the judge's ruling and called the decision "a big victory in our fight to keep tackling the climate crisis and protect one of our best sources of clean, reliable, and affordable energy."
Nancy Pyne, senior adviser for Sierra Club, declared the ruling "a victory for everyone who pays an electricity bill, is part of the clean energy workforce, and breathes air."
"Americans need cheaper and more reliable energy that does not come at the expense of our health and futures," Pyne added. "We are glad to see this illegal order get vacated, and we will continue to advocate for more wind energy projects across the country to lower the cost of energy and create stable, union jobs in our communities."
Kit Kennedy, managing director for power at Natural Resources Defense Council, also emphasized the benefits to US consumers of allowing more wind-power projects to move forward.
"From the beginning of its time in office, the Trump administration put a halt to the wind energy projects that are needed to keep utility bills in check and the grid reliable," Kennedy said. "In the months since, this action has been a devastating blow to workers, electricity customers, and the reliability of the power grid."
Kennedy added that the Trump administration should accept the judge's verdict and "get out of the way of the expansion of renewable energy."
The Trump administration has the option to appeal the judge's order, although it did not respond to questions from the New York Times on Monday about whether it had plans to do so.
Trump's war against wind power comes at a time when rising electric bills, caused in large part by increased demand from energy-devouring artificial intelligence data centers, have become a hot-button political issue.
A recent report from researchers at The Century Foundation and financial abuse watchdog Protect Borrowers found that the average overdue balance on utility bills has surged by 32% over the last three years, going from $597 in 2022 to $789 in 2025. The report also estimated that roughly 1 out of every 20 US households has utility debt that is “so severe it was sent to collections or in arrears."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Ripped for Multilevel Stupidity of Scrapping Automobile Efficiency Standards
"In one stroke, Trump is worsening three of our nation’s most vexing problems," said one critic.
Dec 03, 2025
President Donald Trump's administration drew criticism from climate advocates on Wednesday for taking a hatchet to fuel efficiency standards aimed at reducing US gas consumption and mitigating the damage done by human-made climate change.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has proposed slashing former President Joe Biden's fuel economy requirements for new cars down from 50.4 miles per gallon down to just 34.5 miles per gallon on average by 2031.
NHTSA claims that the change in fuel-efficiency standards would slash up-front costs to cars by roughly $900, although it acknowledges that this would also increase US gasoline consumption, which could mean higher prices at the gas pump.
The move has the support of America's major automobile manufacturers, who said the new rules would give them more flexibility. Ford CEO Jim Farley, for instance, told the Washington Post that the rule change means that the auto industry "can make real progress on carbon emissions and energy efficiency while still giving customers choice and affordability."
Many environmental advocates were quick to hammer Trump for making what they described as a shortsighted policy decision that cost Americans more over the long run in terms of both higher gas prices and carbon emissions.
Kathy Harris, director of clean vehicles at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that Trump is "sticking drivers with higher costs at the pump, all to benefit the oil industry" and predicted that "drivers will be paying hundreds of dollars more at the pump every year if these rules are put in place."
The rule change also drew a scathing review from Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Safe Climate Transport Campaign, who said that the Trump administration's actions were self-destructive on a number of levels.
"In one stroke, Trump is worsening three of our nation’s most vexing problems: the thirst for oil, high gas pump costs, and global warming," he said. "Trump’s action will feed America’s destructive use of oil, while hamstringing us in the green tech race against Chinese and other foreign carmakers. The auto industry will use this rule to drive itself back into a familiar ditch, failing to compete."
The move on fuel-efficiency standards wasn't the only climate-related policy move the administration made this week, as Bloomberg reported on Tuesday that the US Department of Energy also began unwinding a Biden-era program aimed at decarbonizing the building sector by allowing for the certification of "zero emissions" buildings.
Amneh Minkara, deputy director of Sierra Club's Clean Heat Campaign, said that repealing this program was particularly nonsensical since it was a voluntary standard that "did not place any additional burden on builders or owners," and instead represented "a clear way to meet consumer demand for pollution-free buildings."
"Defining what makes a building ‘zero emissions’ gives consumers certainty that when builders or sellers say a building is clean that it actually meets a specific set of criteria," Minkara emphasized. "It also would reduce energy waste, at a time when energy demand is at an all-time high, and lead to lower utility bills."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular