A federal judge ruled in favor of Saint Paul, Minnesota, and several clean energy groups that were looking to win back federal funds for clean energy. The legal decision issued Monday comes after the Trump administration rolled back nearly $7.6 billion in October previously allocated to blue states.
The funding cancellation only targeted projects operating in 16 states that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 and where Democrats served as governor at the time. Projects in other states were spared, even though many are part of the same Department of Energy programs and share the same general purpose.
“Defendants offer no explanation for how their purposeful segregation of grantees based on their electoral support for President Trump rationally advances their stated government interest,” wrote U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in the ruling.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
The funding rollback affected a variety of congressionally-approved projects, including solar power and battery installations, developing hydrogen fuel supply chains, improving energy efficiency and building electric vehicle charging infrastructure. The October cancellation came as the Trump administration has realigned U.S. energy policy away from renewables to instead focus on expanding oil and gas drilling, keeping coal plants running and investing in nuclear power.
In a statement to Straight Arrow News, an Energy Department spokesperson stood by the agency’s “review process” that it said, “evaluated these awards individually and determined they did not meet the standards necessary to justify the continued spending of taxpayer dollars.”
What was argued in the case?
In an announcement of the terminations, the Energy Department said affected projects were “not consistent with this Administration’s goals, policies and priorities” for energy development. The agency said it had determined terminated projects “did not adequately advance the nation’s energy needs, were not economically viable, and would not provide a positive return on investment of taxpayer dollars.”
In legal filings, lawyers for the department had argued that “consideration of partisan politics is constitutionally permissible, including because it can serve as a proxy for legitimate policy considerations.”
The plaintiffs — the City of Saint Paul, Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Plug In America, Elevate Energy, Southeast Community Organization, and the Environmental Defense Fund — argued the cancellations violated the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection clause. The financial awards for these grantees were fully obligated, meaning not only had Congress allocated the funds, but the Energy Department had already signed contracts finalizing the specific awards.
Siding with the plaintiffs’ claim that their equal protection rights were violated, Judge Mehta found the administration failed to explain how segregating grantees based on how they vote served any legitimate government interest. The terminated grants were “otherwise comparable” to awards in Republican-voting states that the Energy Department did not cancel.
“There is no reason to believe that terminating an award to a recipient located in a state whose citizens tend to vote for Democratic candidates — and, particularly, voted against President Trump — furthers the agency’s energy priorities any more than terminating a similar grant of a recipient in a state whose citizens tend to vote for Republican candidates,” Judge Mehta wrote.
What happens next?
The Energy Department did not respond to questions about whether the agency would seek an appeal, but a spokesperson told SAN, “the American people deserve a government that is accountable and responsible in managing taxpayer funds.”
The ruling only applies to a few grant award winners who were plaintiffs in the case. The Energy Department is ordered to vacate termination orders and immediately release the $27.6 million in federal grants to the city of Saint Paul and six organizations involved in the suit. The ruling for these entities is likely to open the door to other affected grant recipients across the country. In total, 321 financial awards were terminated in October, affecting more than 230 projects.
The department also faces scrutiny from an internal agency watchdog over the decision. An Energy Department Inspector General audit announced in mid-December is reviewing whether the cancellations were politically motivated and complied with department rules. The audit is currently ongoing.
