Wire flash
Trump admin admits canceling clean energy grants based on 2024 election results
Editorial responsibility
- No named human review is recorded for this page.
- Source reporting is collected, normalized, translated or condensed automatically when needed.
- Automatically published source-backed update
The Trump administration admitted in court filings that it terminated $7.5 billion in clean energy grants in October 2025 based solely on political criteria, targeting states that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. A Department of Energy lawyer confirmed that 284 terminated grants were located in states with Democratic-caucusing senators and that no programmatic, statutory, or performance-based factors were used. Similar grants in Republican-led states were left untouched. The admission came in a lawsuit filed by California researchers. The administration had previously denied political motivations, with Energy Secretary Chris Wright calling such accusations 'bullshit.' The article also notes that the administration has held up other federal funding, including FEMA disaster aid and childcare funding, for non-supporting states.
Source report
The White House has acknowledged in court that it deliberately canceled federal grants to states that did not vote for President Donald Trump in the 2024 election.
Court Filing Reveals Political Criteria
In court documents filed last week and first reported by The New York Times, Trump administration officials confirmed they terminated $7.5 billion in clean energy grants in October "based solely" on political criteria. The cancellations targeted states with Democratic leadership that voted for Kamala Harris in 2024.
The admission came in a lawsuit filed by California researchers challenging the cancellation of Biden-era funding across multiple federal agencies.
Background on the Grant Cancellations
At the time of the cuts, the White House stated it was slashing the grants—passed during the Biden administration—to prevent tax dollars from being wasted. Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought, a Project 2025 architect, called the funding "Green New Scam funding to fuel the Left's climate agenda" and singled out projects in 16 blue states:
- California
- Colorado
- Connecticut
- Delaware
- Hawaii
- Illinois
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Minnesota
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- Oregon
- Vermont
- Washington
Contradictory Statements
Just one month ago, Energy Secretary Chris Wright angrily insisted to the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology that the cuts "did not involve politics in the decision-making of our review process." He called accusations that the funding cancellations targeted certain states for political reasons "bullshit."
However, a Department of Energy lawyer conceded the obvious in last week's court filing:
"With one exception, the 284 terminated grants had a recipient location and/or at least one place of performance in a state that awarded its electoral votes to Kamala Harris in the 2024 election and has two Democratic-caucusing senators."
The attorney further confessed that the grants were not terminated "based on any programmatic, statutory, cost-reduction or performance-based factor."
Disparate Treatment of States
According to the government's filing, similar green energy grants in Republican-led states that voted for Trump in 2024 were left untouched—despite the Department of Energy recommending their cancellation.
The Trump administration stated it is coming clean now to avoid having to participate in the discovery process for the lawsuit, which could require the government to hand over more damaging internal documents to the researchers' lawyers.
Broader Pattern of Funding Retaliation
The clean energy grants are not an isolated case. The Trump administration has also held up other federal funding for states that did not support the president, including:
- FEMA disaster aid
- Childcare funding
While the court's decision on this lawsuit remains pending, regardless of how the judge rules, Trump is not expected to end his efforts to use federal funding as a punitive tool.
Related: Republicans Urge Stronger Action Against Iran
Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker told The Hill on Thursday that he has encouraged President Trump to continue military strikes against Iran, arguing that negotiations have been fruitless.
"I've expressed publicly and privately my approval of finishing the job, and realizing that negotiations were getting us nowhere," Wicker said. "I've made it clear that Iran, in my judgment, has no intention of negotiating in good faith or keeping a promise and that it's pointless to pretend that they are a trustworthy negotiating party."
Wicker added that he believes the U.S. could "keep the Strait of Hormuz open on our terms" and that the strait is "the key to a successful conclusion of hostilities."
Texas Representative Ronny Jackson, a close friend of Trump's and his former White House physician, told The Hill that the military needs to attack Iran "as hard as we possibly can right now."
"I would do everything I possibly can right now to turn them around. So that'd be my thought," Jackson said.
Source
The New RepublicWestern
Part of this Story
Trump Admin Admits Canceling $7.5B in Clean Energy Grants Based on 2024 Vote