Lansing, Michigan – Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has secured a final win in a multistate case over the federal government’s pause on wind energy permitting, after the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit dismissed the Trump administration’s appeal.
The decision closes the door on an appeal tied to a presidential directive issued on January 20, when President Trump ordered a broad freeze on federal approvals needed for wind energy projects while the federal government conducted a review. Following that order, federal agencies stopped permitting and approval work connected to wind development.
Nessel joined a coalition of 18 attorneys general in challenging the move, arguing that the federal government could not simply halt an entire category of energy approvals without a lawful and reasoned explanation. The coalition said the freeze threatened clean energy planning, power reliability, infrastructure investment and workforce development in states across the country.
In May, the attorneys general filed suit against the federal actions. By December, a federal judge in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts sided with the states, ruling that the permitting pause was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law. The court found that the agencies had violated the Administrative Procedure Act by categorically and indefinitely stopping wind energy approvals without properly explaining the decision.
The federal government appealed that ruling, but later chose to abandon the appeal. This week, the First Circuit entered judgment dismissing it, leaving the states’ victory intact.
“The Trump administration’s attempt to halt federal approvals for wind energy projects would have derailed billions of dollars in infrastructure and workplace investments,” said Attorney General Nessel.
“I am relieved that they have abandoned this disruption to the energy sector here in Michigan and across the country. My office remains committed to fighting back against unlawful actions by the federal government that would raise our electricity bills and harm our environment.”
The lawsuit argued that the freeze damaged states’ efforts to build reliable, diversified and affordable energy systems. It also said the federal actions could interfere with efforts to cut harmful air pollution, meet clean energy goals and respond to climate change.
The case drew support from attorneys general in Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island and Washington, alongside Michigan.
For Nessel’s office, the dismissal marks more than a procedural ending. It confirms that the federal wind permitting pause will not stand, and that state-led challenges can still check sweeping federal actions when courts find they were issued without proper legal grounding.