Trump Administration’s Legal Setbacks Are Good News For Offshore Wind — And The Grid
The title of this post is the same as that of this article on Tech Crunch.
These two paragraphs give more details.
The Trump administration suffered a series of legal setbacks this week after judges allowed work to restart on several offshore wind farms under construction on the East Coast.
The Department of the Interior had ordered a stop to five projects totaling 6 gigawatts of generating capacity in December, citing national security concerns. The judicial orders will allow three projects to resume construction: Revolution Wind off Rhode Island, Empire Wind off New York, and Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind off — you guessed it — Virginia.
The developers each filed lawsuits shortly after the Trump administration issued the stop work order, which had been effective for 90 days.
Trump is now learning you don’t win them all.
I would suggest that you read the full article, as there is a lot of good stuff there.
This is the concluding paragraph.
he potential is even bigger when viewed on a national scale. Offshore wind could generate 13,500 terawatt-hours of electricity per year, which is three times more than the U.S. currently consumes.
If the US, were to use all the fossil fuels, that Trump would like, there would be no point in buying Greenland as the Trump proportion of the resulting Global Warming would probably melt the country.
New York Attorney General Files Lawsuits Against Trump Admin’s Stop-Work Orders For Empire Wind, Sunrise Wind
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
New York Attorney General (AG) Letitia James has filed two lawsuits against what the AG says is “the Trump administration’s unlawful attempt to halt construction” on Empire Wind 1 and Sunrise Wind, two large-scale offshore wind projects being built in the US federal waters off New York.
These three paragraphs add more detail.
In the lawsuits, filed simultaneously for the two projects in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on 9 January, Attorney General James argues that the stop-work orders fail to explain the federal government’s change in position and to provide a genuine justification for the suspension. This makes the orders “arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act”, says the New York AG, whose lawsuit is asking the court to declare the stop-work orders unlawful and block their enforcement.
Pointing out that the two offshore wind farms are expected to power more than one million New York homes, the Attorney General says pausing them could threaten the state’s economy and energy grid, as well as the jobs created by the projects, which currently employ thousands of workers and have already invested billions of US dollars.
Furthermore, the New York AG emphasised that both Empire Wind 1 and Sunrise Wind had undergone more than a decade of extensive review by federal, state, and local authorities, including environmental impact analysis, public comment periods, and coordination with numerous federal agencies, including the US Department of Defense.
I’m no lawyer, but I do think that the New York Attorney General has a good case.
Ørsted-Skyborn JV Takes Legal Action Against US Gov’t Over Stop-Work Order; Seven Turbines Left To Install On Revolution Wind
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
On New Year’s Day, Revolution Wind LLC, the 50/50 joint venture between Ørsted and Skyborn Renewables, filed a supplemental complaint in the US District Court for the District of Columbia and plans to move for a preliminary injunction to block the lease suspension order recently imposed by the US government that stopped construction on its 704 MW project, which is now approximately 87 per cent complete and was expected to start generating power in January 2026.
These five paragraphs give more details of the story.
The lease suspension order, issued by the US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) on 22 December 2025, directed all major offshore wind projects under construction to pause pending a review of alleged national security risks.
The developer asserts the suspension is unlawful and would cause substantial harm to the project, similar to the August 2025 stop-work order.
The project partners say Revolution Wind secured all required federal and state permits in 2023 after extensive reviews and engaged in multi-year consultations with defence authorities, resulting in formal mitigation agreements.
The project is approximately 87 per cent complete, with all foundations, offshore substations and export cables – and 58 of the total 65 wind turbines – installed, and was expected to begin generating power this month.
The developer also noted that the project will supply affordable power to over 350,000 homes under long-term power purchase agreements and support grid reliability in the Northeast.
A Verdict From Google AI
Pending any final result from my learned friends, I asked Google AI, if Revolution Wind will win their case and received this answer.
The question of whether Revolution Wind will ultimately win its case against the federal government’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) has no final answer yet, as the litigation is ongoing. However, a federal judge has so far ruled in favor of Revolution Wind in a key preliminary step.
Key Developments in the Case
Initial Ruling: In September 2025, a U.S. District Court judge in D.C., Royce Lamberth, granted a preliminary injunction that allowed construction on the nearly-complete project to resume. The judge stated that Revolution Wind was likely to succeed on the merits of its claims and that the project would face “substantial harm” otherwise. The judge called the government’s initial “stop-work order” the “height of arbitrary and capricious action” because it failed to provide a factual basis for the cited national security concerns.
Outcome Uncertainty: The preliminary injunction allows work to continue while the full case proceeds, which could take years. The final outcome of the case depends on the court’s ultimate decision on the merits of the lawsuit
There is going to be some interesting reporting of this case, when the judges give their verdict.
The most interesting case, will probably be the one surrounding Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind as that is a 2.6 GW wind farm, which will generate a lot of fees for lawyers.
If President Maduro Is Found Guilty Of The United States Charges Will He Face The Death Penalty?
I asked Google AI the question in the title of this post and received this answer.
Nicolás Maduro has been indicted on several charges in a U.S. federal court, primarily in the Southern District of New York. The potential penalties for these charges are:
- Narco-terrorism conspiracy: This charge has a mandatory minimum prison sentence of 20 years and a maximum of life in prison.
- Cocaine importation conspiracy: This charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years and a maximum of life in prison.
- Weapons charges (using and possessing machine guns and destructive devices in furtherance of the conspiracies): These charges carry a mandatory minimum sentence of 30 years and a maximum of life in prison.
The maximum penalty for all charges combined is life imprisonment in a U.S. federal prison, a sentence that has been described as a “de facto life sentence” in the media. The U.S. Attorney General has stated that the goal is for him to face justice in a U.S. court and, if convicted, he could spend the rest of his life behind bars.
Will this be enough for Trump?
Who knows?
But The Lady On The Train may have a say.
Could Artificial Intelligent Judge Cases Without A Jury?
I just had to ask Google AI this question and received this answer.
Artificial intelligence is not currently used to judge cases or issue final verdicts without human oversight in any major legal system, and legal experts believe a full replacement is unlikely in the foreseeable future. The complex nature of law requires human qualities like empathy, moral judgment, and the ability to assess nuance and credibility, which AI currently lacks.
The current role of AI in the judiciary is primarily used as a tool to assist human judges and lawyers, not replace them.
Could Artificial Intelligent Perform Sentencing In Cases?
I just had to ask Google AI this second question and received this answer.
While artificial intelligence (AI) is already used in various legal processes, it cannot perform actual sentencing in legal cases in a legally binding capacity. Legal systems currently maintain that judicial discretion and the final decision-making authority must rest with a human judge to ensure accountability, due process, and fairness.
Does Artificial Intelligence Support A Reduced Role For Juries In Legal Cases?
I just had to ask Google AI this third question and received this answer.
Artificial intelligence is currently being used to support, not replace, human decision-makers in the legal system, with experts highlighting the need for human judgment, empathy, and accountability in jury trials. The debate over AI’s potential to reduce the role of juries is ongoing, with arguments both for and against.
Conclusion
In all these questions, artificial intelligent didn’t appear to act above its station.
US Offshore Wind Developer Sues Gov’t Over Stop-Work Order
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading
Dominion Energy has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s stop-work order issued on 22 December that directed all major US offshore wind projects under construction to pause while federal agencies review alleged national security risks, AP and US media report.
This paragraph adds more detail.
In its complaint filed in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on 23 December, Dominion argues the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) order is “arbitrary and capricious” and violates constitutional and statutory limits on executive action.
I’m no lawyer, but I did have some excellent executive active with my late lawyer wife, so I get the gist of what is hinted.
I would not be happy, if I was an American citizen, who had to pick u[ the costs of Trump’s misdemeanours.
US Judge Overturns Trump’s Ban On Wind Energy Project Permits
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
A federal judge has struck down the US President Donald Trump’s indefinite halt of all federal approvals and permitting for new wind energy projects.
Trump is obviously very strong in his opposition to wind power, as he issued the ”Wind Order” on his first day back in office.
He received this robust reply from Oceantic Network CEO Liz Burdock.
Today’s decision is welcome news, not just for the thousands of American workers and businesses across 40 states supporting offshore wind in the U.S., but also for the critical relief the wind industry will provide to lower skyrocketing electricity prices for millions of American families with reliable, affordable power.
Overturning the unlawful blanket halt to offshore wind permitting activities is needed to achieve our nation’s energy and economic priorities of bringing more power online quickly, improving grid reliability, and driving billions of new American steel manufacturing and shipbuilding investments. We thank the Attorneys General and the Alliance for Clean Energy New York for taking this case forward to protect American business interests against the politicization of our energy sector.
I don’t think we’ve heard the last of this legal argument.
A Thought On Trump v The BBC
Nearly twenty years ago, I shared a train journey between Cambridge and London, with a delightful black lady, who was probably in her seventies. It turned out she was a New York State Supreme Court Judge, who was doing a bit of week-end sight-seeing, whilst at a legal conference at Cambridge University.
One of the big regrets in my life, is that I didn’t exchange cards with this wonderful lady, as it would be so revealing to ask her opinion of Trump v. The BBC.
But, I also feel it is too late, as my research indicates, that she might be now giving judgments in a higher court.
But if that lady is typical of the quality of US Supreme Court justices, at both Federal and State level, then I am fairly sure, that anybody who appeals to their court will get a fair hearing according to the law.
Could that be a difficulty for someone with Trump’s personality?
Why Is The Highway Code Only A Code And Not A Law?
If you ask Google AI, the question in the title of this post, you receive this answer.
The Highway Code is not a law in itself, but a collection of rules and guidance for all road users. While it contains some legally enforceable rules (marked with “MUST” or “MUST NOT”), and breaking them is a criminal offence, it also includes non-binding advice. The “code” serves as an authoritative source of information, making it easier for people to understand the law and helping courts to establish liability by using the advisory rules as evidence of a standard of expected behaviour.
So why is it just a collection of rules and guidance?
Coming home yesterday on a bus, a smartly-dressed elderly lady sat next to me and we got talking.
Something must have triggered it, as she told me why the Highway Code was just a code and not a law.
Apparently, her father had written it and he had insisted that it should not be made into law and the government of the day in 1931 had agreed he should have his way.
I asked Google AI, who actually wrote it and received this answer.
The Highway Code was written by the UK government, with the first edition published in 1931 under the authority of the then Minister of Transport, Herbert Morrison. The code was created as a result of the Road Traffic Act 1930, which required the Minister of Transport to issue the guide for all road users.
It looks like as Herbert Morrison’s daughter has passed on, he didn’t write the Code himself.
Official Quits After Dispute Over Trump’s Eisenhower Sword Gift To King Charles
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on the BBC.
This is the sub-heading.
The director of the Dwight D Eisenhower Presidential Library has stepped down after a dispute with the Trump administration over gifting a sword in its collection to King Charles, according to the BBC’s US partner, CBS News.
These three paragraphs add more detail to the story.
Todd Arrington, the head of the library in Kansas, resigned on Monday after declining to remove an original sword from the library’s collection to give to the King during President Donald Trump’s visit to the United Kingdom last month, CBS reported, citing anonymous sources.
Charles was instead gifted a replica during Trump’s UK visit, Buckingham Palace said at the time.
In an interview with CBS News, Arrington said he was told to “Resign – or be fired”.
Trump had better watch himself, as the United States has armies of lawyers and I’m sure that the unfortunate Mr. Arrington will have some legal offers, he will find great advantage in accepting.
Offshore Construction Work Resumes On Revolution Wind After US Judge’s Ruling
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
A US judge in Washington has cleared the way for work to resume on the 704 MW Revolution Wind offshore wind farm after granting a temporary injunction that lifted the federal stop-work order imposed in August.
These two paragraphs add details to the post.
On 22 August, the US Department of the Interior’s (DOI) Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued a stop-work order halting all offshore construction activities on the 704 MW project, which is already 80 per cent completed, according to its developers, Ørsted and Skyborn Renewables.
A few days later, the joint venture challenged the stop-work order in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, while Connecticut and Rhode Island filed their own lawsuits against the decision on the same day.
I’ve written about this project before in ‘This Has Nothing To Do With National Security’ | Revolution Wind Halt Leaves Connecticut Leaders Demanding Answers
The Anonymous Widower 