Judge Revives Wind Farm That Trump Halted Off Martha’s Vineyard

A federal judge on Tuesday ruled that construction could continue on a $4.5 billion wind farm off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., striking down the Trump administration’s decision to halt work on the nearly complete project.

Judge Brian E. Murphy of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a preliminary injunction that would allow the developers of the wind farm, known as Vineyard Wind, to restart construction while the broader legal battle unfolds.

The ruling was the fourth legal setback that the Trump administration has suffered in its quest to throttle the country’s nascent offshore wind industry.

Other federal judges have issued preliminary injunctions that allowed three other projects — Revolution Wind off Rhode Island, Empire Wind off New York and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind off Virginia — to resume construction.

Vineyard Wind is already 95 percent complete and is sending some power to the electric grid in Massachusetts. Once fully operational, the project is expected to generate enough electricity to power more than 400,000 homes and businesses in the state.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

DeWayfarer · 61-69, M

It seems that Congress no longer controls the purse, if Trump can do things like this. This should have never been shutdown to begin with.

Limits on Presidential Authority to Halt Projects

You make an important distinction regarding presidential powers in relation to energy projects: the ability to initiate versus the ability to halt.
Authority to Initiate vs. Stop

Authority to Initiate:

The President can facilitate the start of federally approved projects by issuing permits, directing funding, or promoting policies that support development.

This power is often exercised to stimulate economic growth, create jobs, or transition to renewable energy sources.

Authority to Stop:

Halting a project typically relies on existing laws, regulations, or findings of harm. The President may not have the unilateral authority to stop projects without a clear legal or environmental justification.

Critics argue that stopping a project without a legitimate reason undermines the legislative framework established by Congress, which is designed to govern energy projects.

Importance of Congressional Oversight

Your perspective highlights the crucial role that Congress plays in ensuring decisions regarding project halting or continuation are balanced and represent broader interests. If the President were to halt a project lacking a defined emergency, it raises questions about accountability and adherence to the legislative process, reinforcing the need for checks and balances in governance.

This ongoing debate is central to understanding the dynamics of energy policy and executive authority in the U.S.