A US federal judge in Massachusetts has tentatively accepted the lawsuit filed by 18 state attorneys general challenging the presidential memorandum issued on 20 January that halts leasing and permitting for wind energy projects, and calls for reviews of existing permits. The case is, however, likely to move forward only against the Department of the Interior (DOI) and Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.
Judge William G. Young said at a hearing on 18 June that he planned to proceed with the case, denying the motion to dismiss filed by the Trump administration, but that he would likely dismiss the action against the US President and other heads of federal departments and agencies named in the lawsuit, according to reports by Bloomberg and Associated Press .
The lawsuit was filed at the beginning of May by a coalition of attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D. C., seeking to overturn Donald Trump’s presidential memorandum (Wind Directive), issued on 20 January, and its subsequent implementation by federal agencies.
According to the lawsuit , these violate the Administrative Procedure Act and other laws by offering no reasoned justification for reversing federal policy and freezing all approvals. The states also claim that the sudden halt on all permitting violates numerous federal statutes that prescribe specific procedures and timelines for federal permitting and approvals.
The hearing on 18 June follows a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which was filed by the Trump administration and argues that the attorneys general’s legal action has no standing as there is no final agency action, since the presidential memorandum only defers issuing permits and postpones the permitting process by seeking comprehensive reviews.
The federal judge has, however, identified that there is a final agency action and decided to tentatively proceed with the case to a motion for summary judgment in September. The federal agencies now must submit administrative records that document their decision(s) to implement the Wind Directive by 2 July, according to a report by The New Bedford Light .
Judge Young noted that his rulings at the hearing were tentative and that these could be changed in his subsequent formal written analysis and opinion.