Judge: You Can't Just Nix Clean Energy Grants Because of 'Blue States'

Well, this is an interesting turn of events: a federal judge just told the Department of Energy (DOE) that, no, they actually can't cancel $82.1 million in clean energy grants just because they felt like it. The decision means funding for 11 projects is now expected to be restored, much to the chagrin of whoever thought this was a good idea.

U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta dropped the hammer last Thursday, making it clear that the plaintiffs — a group led by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers — had a point. The grants, originally greenlit by the Biden administration, were unceremoniously axed by the Trump administration. The plaintiffs' argument? Purely political.

Targeting 'Blue States' Was Not a Winning Strategy

This isn't even the first time the DOE has been caught with its hand in the political cookie jar. Back in January, they were ordered to reverse a whopping $27.6 billion in grant cancellations. In that case, the DOE didn't even dispute that a major reason for the cancellations was that grantees were in states that had voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris. Because apparently that's where we are now.

The current plaintiffs? Seven DOE awardees, all conveniently located in "Blue States" like New York, Oregon, Connecticut, Minnesota, and Colorado. Their awards were terminated in the same October 2025 round of cancellations as the previous case. Coincidence? The judge certainly didn't think so.

For instance, the New Buildings Institute had four Oregon grants canceled, all from the DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. During a recent House committee meeting, Congressman Gabe Amo even pressed Energy Secretary Chris Wright on restoring these "wrongfully terminated" projects. Wright, predictably, denied any political shenanigans.

Except, the DOE's October terminations included over $7.5 billion in awards for clean energy projects in, you guessed it, states that voted for Harris. The plaintiffs' complaint even cited a social media post from Russell Vought, then-director of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, gleefully mentioning the cancellation of "Nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding" in specific states—all of which voted for Harris. Subtle.

The plaintiffs argued, quite rightly, that such partisan discrimination violates the Fifth Amendment's equal protection guarantee. Turns out, "political retribution" isn't a valid reason to treat federal grantees like a political football. Who knew?

Among the grants reinstated are a $49.8 million award to the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, aimed at reclaiming critical minerals from electrolyzers and fuel cells, and a $6.1 million award to Proton Energy Systems for reducing hydrogen production costs. These cancellations, the plaintiffs stated, caused significant harm, from lost funding to reputational damage. Because when you're trying to save the planet, a sudden loss of $50 million tends to put a damper on things.