On August 22, 2025, the Trump administration ordered an immediate halt to construction on the Revolution Wind project, an ambitious offshore wind farm situated off the Atlantic coast. The project, a joint venture between Danish energy giant Orsted and Skyborn Renewables, was already 80% finished, with all offshore foundations in place and 45 out of 65 wind turbines installed, according to Reuters. The abrupt stop-work order, justified by the administration on the grounds of unspecified national security concerns, has since ignited a legal and political firestorm stretching from New England to Washington, D.C.
The Revolution Wind project was designed to be a cornerstone of the region's transition to clean energy, supplying enough electricity to power 350,000 homes in Rhode Island and Connecticut upon completion. With a price tag of around $5 billion already invested and an additional $1 billion at risk if delays continue, the stakes are enormous for both the local economy and the broader push for renewable energy. Orsted, the lead developer, has warned that the specialized vessels required for offshore wind construction are in limited supply. If they depart due to the work stoppage, the project could face at least a year’s delay—or, in a worst-case scenario, cancellation altogether.
The legal response was swift and coordinated. On September 4, 2025, Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha and Connecticut Attorney General William Tong announced plans to file suit in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island, targeting the Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management, and their appointed leaders. Simultaneously, Orsted and Skyborn filed a separate lawsuit in federal court in Washington, D.C., naming U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and five other federal defendants. Both complaints allege that the stop-work order was “arbitrary and capricious,” lacking both statutory authority and an evidentiary basis, and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
“If he wants to behave like a yo-yo, that’s up to him, but you can’t run government that way,” Neronha told reporters, as quoted by The Public’s Radio. “The decision-making has to be rational. And it has to be rational because not only do Rhode Islanders, but industry relies on predictability and rationality.” Neronha emphasized that the halt had idled more than a thousand local workers and could jeopardize energy reliability across southern New England.
Connecticut Attorney General Tong echoed these concerns, stating in a public statement, “With zero justification, Trump wants to mothball the project, send workers home, and saddle Connecticut families with millions of dollars in higher energy costs. This kind of erratic and reckless governing is blatantly illegal, and we’re suing to stop it.”
The lawsuits are not just legal maneuvers—they are also political statements. Rhode Island lawmakers, including House Speaker Joe Shekarchi and Senate President Val Lawson, issued a joint statement supporting the legal action: “We applaud the lawsuit filed today by Attorney General Peter Neronha to overturn President Trump’s unjustified stop-work order of the Revolution Wind project that is 80 percent completed. This endeavor supports thousands of good-paying private sector Rhode Island jobs and is expected to deliver enough electricity to power several hundred thousand homes in New England. This infusion of new power is important to address energy affordability and costs for Rhode Island consumers. This project is essential for our economy, the environment, and the affordability of our energy supply, and we wholeheartedly support today’s legal action.”
For Orsted, the timing of the halt could hardly be worse. The company recently announced plans to raise 60 billion Danish crowns ($9.41 billion) through a rights issue, as reported by Reuters. The uncertainty surrounding Revolution Wind threatens not only the company’s bottom line but also the momentum of offshore wind development in the United States more broadly.
The Trump administration’s opposition to offshore wind is well documented. President Trump has repeatedly criticized wind energy as “ugly, unreliable, and expensive,” and his administration has leaned on multiple federal agencies to rein in wind development. Critics argue that this stance puts the administration at odds with its own stated goal of boosting domestic energy supplies, especially as the nation’s growing appetite for artificial intelligence and data processing places unprecedented demands on the power grid.
The controversy over Revolution Wind is unfolding against a wider legal and political backdrop. In May, 17 Democratic-led states and the District of Columbia filed suit in Boston seeking to prevent the Trump administration from suspending new wind energy leasing and permitting. During a recent hearing, U.S. District Judge William Young remarked that it was not the court’s role to second-guess the president’s policy preferences, though he questioned whether federal agencies had provided adequate justification for the pause. “The record here is pretty thin, and that’s being pretty generous,” Judge Young observed, according to Reuters.
The Department of the Interior has declined to comment on the ongoing litigation. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, part of the same department, previously halted a neighboring offshore wind project owned by Norwegian energy firm Equinor in April. That order was subsequently lifted following diplomatic efforts by Norway’s government, suggesting that international pressure can sometimes sway federal decisions on energy policy.
For local communities in Rhode Island and Connecticut, the stakes are immediate and tangible. The halt has thrown more than a thousand local workers out of their jobs and raised fears about higher energy costs and reduced reliability. The uncertainty also threatens to undermine the region’s broader climate goals. Rhode Island lawmakers see projects like Revolution Wind as central to their strategy for achieving carbon neutrality by 2050, a target that now seems increasingly precarious.
Despite the legal and political wrangling, there is a sense of urgency among supporters of the project. A decision on injunctive relief—which could allow work on Revolution Wind to resume—could come within days or weeks, according to Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha. But with specialized vessels and billions of dollars hanging in the balance, the clock is ticking for a resolution that will determine not just the fate of one wind farm, but the trajectory of offshore wind energy in the United States.
As the legal battles intensify and political rhetoric heats up, the Revolution Wind saga has become a high-stakes test of America’s commitment to renewable energy, economic stability, and the rule of law. The coming weeks will reveal whether the courts, policymakers, and industry leaders can find a path forward—or if the winds of change will stall just off the Atlantic coast.