The new legal landscape for canceled DOE awards

Last fall, the Department of Energy canceled hundreds of clean energy grants, and the legal fight over that decision is now working its way through the courts. In two cases so far, both in Washington, D.C., judges have overturned cancellations after the government admitted it targeted projects largely because they were located in states that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024 — 7 awards in a case brought by the City of St. Paul, and 11 in a case brought by the American Institute of Chemical Engineers. Both rulings found this violated equal protection rights. Energy Secretary Chris Wright has denied politics played a role, even though other officials have acknowledged it did.

A separate, larger case in San Francisco, involving University of California researchers, could have wider effects if it succeeds, since many researchers there were part of a bigger DOE-funded project. That case could help restore funding for California's hydrogen hub (ARCHES), which had been awarded up to $1.2 billion and paused work after its grant was cut, as well as a smaller carbon-capture project. Separately, a low-carbon cement company, Sublime Systems, lost an $87 million grant and is now suing in a different court for about $2 billion in damages, arguing the cancellation broke its contract and cost the company money, time, and value.

None of this guarantees money will flow again soon — most of the canceled grants aren't part of an active lawsuit, and the administration is also looking for ways to make future cancellations easier. For homeowners, the immediate relevance is limited, but it signals that federal clean energy funding decisions remain unsettled and could keep shifting depending on how these cases play out.