On October 16, 2025, a wave of lawsuits swept across the United States as Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, joined by attorneys general from 22 other states and the District of Columbia, challenged the Trump administration’s sudden cancellation of the $7 billion Solar for All program. This bold legal maneuver, announced during a virtual press conference featuring both Mayes and California Attorney General Rob Bonta, has spotlighted a fierce national debate over clean energy funding, government contracts, and the future of affordable electricity for low-income Americans.
The Solar for All program, created under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, was designed to dramatically expand access to solar energy—especially for disadvantaged and rural communities. By August 2024, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had allocated all funds, with Arizona alone set to receive $156 million. The Hopi Tribe was awarded a separate $25 million grant, intended to bring solar panels and battery storage to nearly 600 homes on the Hopi Reservation, many of which had never before enjoyed reliable electricity. Nationwide, the program was projected to benefit more than 900,000 low-income households.
But in August 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin declared the program dead. Citing the newly enacted One Big Beautiful Bill Act—President Donald Trump’s $3.4 trillion tax and spending package—Zeldin said the EPA had lost all authority to administer Solar for All or continue distributing its funds. In a stark video announcement on August 7, Zeldin insisted, "EPA no longer has the authority to administer the program or the appropriated funds to keep this boondoggle alive." He later added on social media, "Today, the Trump EPA is announcing that we are ending Solar for All for good, saving US taxpayers ANOTHER $7 BILLION!"
For Arizona, the consequences were immediate and severe. According to Mayes, the loss of Solar for All funding threatens to push clean energy out of reach for thousands, just as the state faces a projected 40% increase in energy demand. Arizona, now home to 151 data centers and ranked seventh nationally in data center count, used more than 1.5 gigawatts of electricity in 2024 alone. Utility rates are already on the rise, with Arizona Public Service customers bracing for double-digit increases in 2026. The cancellation of Solar for All, Mayes warned, will only make matters worse for consumers struggling with skyrocketing bills.
Mayes was unequivocal about the legal stakes. "Without this program, for many Arizonans, clean energy will be out of reach," she said during the press conference. She further argued that the EPA’s interpretation of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was both legally and contractually flawed: "Despite Congress’s express decision to rescind only ‘unobligated balances,’ the EPA interpreted H.R. 1 as somehow rescinding all appropriations related to Solar for All. Not only erroneous as a matter of statutory interpretation, but the EPA’s view is also erroneous as a matter of contract law: the EPA’s interpretation of H.R. 1 does not constitute grounds for termination under the express terms and conditions of the Grant Agreements."
The lawsuits—filed first in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims seeking monetary damages, and then in federal court in Washington state seeking reinstatement of the program—allege that the EPA’s move violates the Administrative Procedures Act and the Separation of Powers Doctrine. According to the coalition, the vast majority of Solar for All funds were already obligated by August 2024, making their withdrawal both unlawful and devastating to state-level projects.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta echoed these concerns, noting that his state stood to lose $250 million in congressionally obligated funds. "The Trump administration is trying to hold us in the past, tethered to fossil fuel companies," Bonta said. "In doing so, Trump is making America more expensive and more polluted." He pointed out that the lawsuits against the Trump administration now number 44 in California alone since the start of the year—a sign of the growing legal friction between state governments and federal policy shifts.
For Arizona’s most vulnerable residents, the stakes are even higher. Mayes estimated that more than 11,000 low-income households in the state will see their energy bills spike by 20% due to the loss of $156 million in Solar for All funding. The program’s four-pronged approach—covering residential rooftop solar for low- and moderate-income households, workforce development, and a rural and tribal pilot—was designed to bring tangible relief to those hit hardest by rising energy costs. The Hopi Tribe’s $25 million grant, for instance, would have finally brought electricity to hundreds of homes through solar panels and battery storage, a milestone for a community long underserved by traditional utilities.
Nationally, the Solar for All program was expected to create thousands of jobs and prevent at least 90,000 tons of CO2 emissions annually in Arizona alone. The Arizona Commerce Authority estimates that the cuts could cost the state $58 billion and 69,000 jobs, further complicating efforts to reach carbon neutrality goals and improve air quality. The timing couldn’t be worse: Arizona Public Service recently backed out of its commitment to use zero-carbon sources by 2050, and the impacts of climate change are driving up both energy demand and temperatures.
Meanwhile, Arizonans now face a ticking clock. Due to the federal cuts, residents have only until the end of 2025 to take advantage of a 30% federal tax credit—an average of $9,000 in savings—to install solar panels. The credit, created by the Inflation Reduction Act, was originally set to last until July 2036. But as the Trump administration targets clean energy initiatives, this window may close sooner than many had planned.
While the EPA has declined to comment on pending litigation, the administration has defended its actions as a necessary rollback of what it calls expensive and unreliable renewable energy programs. Trump has repeatedly argued that federal support for solar and wind is wasteful, a stance that has drawn sharp criticism from Democratic officials and environmental advocates alike.
The legal fight over Solar for All is just the latest in a series of clashes between state governments and the Trump administration on environmental policy. With Democrats in the minority in both houses of Congress, state attorneys general have become key players in challenging federal rollbacks. The lawsuits over Solar for All come just days after a similar suit was filed by a coalition of solar companies and labor unions, underscoring the broad coalition determined to restore the program.
As the courtroom battles unfold, the future of clean energy access for low-income Americans hangs in the balance. For Arizona and its neighbors, the outcome will determine not only the fate of billions in funding and thousands of jobs, but also the state’s ability to meet the challenges of a hotter, more energy-hungry future.
