Court rules DOE violated 5th Amendment by nixing grants

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia has ruled that the Department of Energy (DOE) violated the Fifth Amendment’s promise of equal protection under the law by canceling renewable energy grants solely for projects planned in states that voted against President Trump in the 2024 election.

The plaintiffs, including the city of St. Paul, Minnesota, were recipients of seven grants totaling $27.6 million. The DOE terminated more than $7.56 billion in renewable energy grants in early October.

DOE Secretary Christopher Wright at the time said the projects affected “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.”

According to the Jan. 12 order, however, the DOE conceded that the canceled grants were “comparable” to those issued for projects in Republican-majority states, which were not rescinded.

“The only identifiable difference — the grant recipient’s state’s political identity and, specifically, its electoral votes cast against President Trump — does not provide a rational basis for why Defendants chose to terminate Plaintiffs’ grants over others to advance their stated interest of aligning grant funding with agency priorities,” U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta wrote.

The plaintiffs also asserted that the DOE’s termination of grants ran afoul of the First Amendment, a claim the Court dismissed.

The parties have until Jan. 16 to file a Joint Status Report, in which the plaintiffs will indicate whether or not they are seeking prospective injunctive relief.

“At a general level, all agree that if the court were to find Defendants’ actions unconstitutional, it would be appropriate to return Plaintiffs to the status quo before the terminations,” Mehta wrote. “The court accordingly vacates the October termination notices as to the seven awards at issue in this litigation.”

In a statement shared with OPIS, the DOE reiterated its case.

“We disagree with the judge’s decision and stand by our review process which evaluated these awards individually and determined they did not meet the standards necessary to justify the continued spending of taxpayer dollars,” spokesperson Caroline Murzin said. “The American people deserve a government that is accountable and responsible in managing taxpayer funds.”

–Reporting by Colt Shaw, cshaw@opisnet.com