In a stunning reversal, the Trump administration has effectively conceded in court filings that it canceled more than $7.5 billion in federal clean energy grants based entirely on whether states voted for Donald Trump in 2024.
Government lawyers acknowledged last week that the October terminations targeted projects in Democratic-led states that supported Kamala Harris, with no consideration given to program merit, cost savings, or performance metrics. The Department of Energy's own words in the filing left little room for interpretation: grants were eliminated based "solely on the political identity of the grant recipient's state."
Yet within hours of the filing's disclosure, the Energy Department issued a statement insisting the admission was a "misrepresentation," claiming the political criteria applied only to timing, not to the actual termination decisions themselves.
The reversal emerged from a lawsuit brought by University of California researchers and faculty members challenging the abrupt cancellations of already-awarded grants. The plaintiffs had characterized the move as part of a broader "political 'cost-cutting' agenda and ideological purity campaign."
The mechanics of the purge reveal a starkly partisan operation. In September, the Energy Department compiled a list recommending cancellation of more than 600 grants across states represented by both parties. But when the White House Budget Office, headed by Russell Vought, acted in October, it terminated only 284 of those. With a single exception, every canceled grant went to a state that voted for Harris and elected Democratic senators to Congress.
Vought announced the move on X, describing the action as canceling "nearly $8 billion in Green New Scam funding" destined for "the Left's climate agenda." He listed the targeted states: California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington.
Hundreds of energy grants in Republican-led states that had also been flagged by the Energy Department for potential elimination were left untouched, despite qualifying for the same fiscal scrutiny applied to Democratic strongholds.
The episode unfolds as the White House pursues even more expansive control over federal grant-making. A proposed 400-page rule published in May would require all discretionary awards to "demonstrably advance the President's policy priorities" and comply with additional White House standards, including opposition to what officials describe as "anti-American values" and "racial preferences."
Energy Secretary Chris Wright defended the department's record before Congress last month, flatly stating that "no decisions were made on politics," a claim now directly contradicted by the government's own court filings.
Author James Rodriguez: "When officials put their admissions in writing and then immediately deny they wrote what they wrote, you know the political calculation has become impossible to hide."
Comments