Trump's offshore wind project freeze prompts lawsuits from states and developers

States and offshore wind developers have filed federal suits challenging the Trump administration's Dec. 22 order to suspend work on five East Coast projects for at least 90 days; the administration cited national security concerns but has not provided specifics.

Federal lawsuits have been filed after the administration ordered a pause on several large offshore wind projects on the East Coast. The administration announced the Dec. 22 suspension of leases for five projects for at least 90 days, citing national security concerns without disclosing details. Developers and two states have asked a federal court in Washington, D.C., to block or overturn the order and to allow work to continue. Known details: - The paused projects include Empire Wind, Sunrise Wind, Vineyard Wind, Revolution Wind, and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind. - The administration said the pause was meant to protect national security, prevent conflicts with military readiness and maritime operations, and ensure stewardship of ocean areas, but it did not present public specifics about the security concerns. - Equinor (Empire Wind) and Orsted (Sunrise Wind and Revolution Wind in a joint venture) filed suits in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia; Dominion Energy Virginia was the first developer to sue. - Connecticut and Rhode Island filed a request seeking a preliminary injunction to allow work on Revolution Wind to continue. - Empire Wind LLC requested expedited court consideration, saying the project could face likely termination if construction cannot resume by Jan. 16 due to scheduling and financing constraints; Orsted asked a judge to vacate the suspension and said it had relied on federal approvals and regular agency coordination. Summary: The legal filings seek court orders to block or set aside the administration's suspension so construction can resume; some filings request expedited or preliminary relief. The administration frames the pause as a national security measure, but it has not publicly detailed the concerns. The timing and actions the court will take next are undetermined at this time.