|
WASHINGTON, D.C. – America First Legal (AFL) has uncovered that multiple states lack evidence to support their claims of harm in their lawsuit challenging the Trump Administration’s Wind Memorandum, which temporarily pauses offshore and onshore federal wind leasing and permitting for a comprehensive review of the legal and environmental basis for prior approvals.
On May 5, 2025, seventeen states and the District of Columbia sued the Trump Administration and several federal agencies, challenging the implementation of the Wind Memo, claiming it would cause irreparable harm to each state’s environment, climate, and economic, transportation, and security interests.
The plaintiff states include New York, Massachusetts, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia. To determine whether their claims of injury were true and accurate, AFL filed multiple records requests with the plaintiffs, requesting:
All records of any agency findings, assessments, analyses, or determinations identifying an increase in harmful air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, or greenhouse gas emissions, within the state after January 20, 2025, to present. All records identifying or documenting adverse effects on the state’s (a) navigational safety interests; (b) transportation interests; (c) state security interests; (d) state commercial or economic interests; and (e) marine mammals within the state, that the agency has assessed, analyzed, or communicated after January 20, 2025, to present. All records of any agency findings, assessments, analyses, or determinations for cancellations of wind-energy projects that have resulted in documented adverse climate effects to the state after January 20, 2025, to present.
To date, the Illinois Power Agency, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, the Maryland Energy Administration, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, and the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy have responded. All claimed that they lack records responsive to AFL’s requests seeking to obtain evidence of actual harm. Specifically, the responses stated:
Illinois Power Agency replied, “The Agency has conducted a search and has determined that it does not have any records responsive to any of the three requests.” Illinois Environmental Protection Agency answered, “Following a search, the Illinois EPA has determined there to be no information responsive to your request.” Maryland Energy Administration responded, “After an extensive review, we do not have any documents responsive to your request.” Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection replied, “After a reasonable search, the Department has found no records responsive to your request.” Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy responded, “After a search, to the best of this public body’s knowledge, information, and belief, the public record(s) do not exist as described by you, or by another name or description reasonably known to the public body regarding bullets number 2 and 3. Regarding bullet number 1: All records of any agency findings, assessments, analyses, or determinations identifying an increase in harmful air pollutants, including nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, or greenhouse gas emissions, within the State of Michigan after January 20, 2025, to present, EGLE is unable to search for the records you seek given the information you have provided.”
AFL has previously exposed other states’ lack of standing in their own cases against the Trump Administration, including California and Washington.
These states’ responses to AFL’s records requests repeatedly expose a lack of standing. AFL will continue to expose baseless litigation efforts aimed at undermining the America First agenda.
“It would appear a pattern exists in litigation against the Trump Administration: plaintiff states suing the Administration cannot back their pleadings with actual evidence,” said Dan Epstein, Vice President of America First Legal. “The federal courts lack jurisdiction to hear cases challenging presidential actions when the complaining parties lack standing; these lawsuits risk involving the courts in political theater, rather than a good faith legal dispute, aimed at obstructing lawful executive authority.”
Learn more about AFL’s Blue State investigations here.
|
