• 4 min de lectura
• 4 min de lectura
A coalition of seven northeastern states is suing the Trump administration, seeking to block a deal struck by the Department of the Interior to buy back offshore wind leases from TotalEnergies in exchange for investments in oil and gas projects in the United States. Led by New York Attorney General Letitia James, a vocal critic of Donald Trump and the administration, they are asserting that the deal with TotalEnergies is "blatantly unlawful," jeopardizing the state's ability to meet growing energy demands and renewable energy goals, as well as the economies of the states.
The coalition consists of New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Maine. Asserting the deal with TotalEnergies is an "unlawful agreement," the states are asking the courts to strike down the agreement, vacate the lease cancellation, and stop further actions by the administration to implement the deal. It comes after a group of 18 states and the District of Columbia won a previous suit, with the courts blocking actions by the Trump administration to indefinitely stop the review of project proposals for wind farms.
"This pay-not-to-play scheme pressuring a foreign company to forego planned offshore wind projects in America in favor of gas and oil drilling is an outrageous abuse of taxpayer dollars that hurts our ability to meet our energy needs, create good jobs, and help secure American energy independence while reducing emissions," said New York Governor Kathy Hochul.
The Department of the Interior announced in March that it had entered into an agreement with Attentive Energy, a subsidiary of TotalEnergies, to repay the company the monies it had spent to buy leases off New York, New Jersey, and North Carolina. It had paid nearly $1 billion in winning bids in the New York Bight auction and a smaller auction for a property off North Carolina. The administration agreed to repay the lease values in exchange for the company investing similar amounts in the oil and gas projects on the Gulf Coast, canceling the offshore wind leases, and agreeing not to develop future U.S. wind energy projects.
James, who has already been the target of Trump's retribution for her prosecution of the Trump Organization, said today, "After repeatedly losing in court, this administration cooked up a sham deal to pay a foreign energy company hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to abandon offshore wind and invest in oil and gas instead. We are fighting back to stop this illegal agreement."
The coalition asserts that the cancellation of the Attentive Energy projects will harm their states' economies, energy grids, and climate goals. The attorneys general argue that the Trump administration's deal violated the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which limits DOI's ability to cancel offshore wind leases. The DOI must hold a hearing, they assert, specifically find that continuing the lease would likely cause serious harm to life, property, national security, or the environment, and determine that the benefits of cancellation outweigh the benefits of allowing the lease to continue. The DOI did none of that before canceling the Attentive Energy lease. The coalition also argues that the deal violates the Judgment Fund Act because the $795 million payment was not a legitimate compromise settlement in an imminent lawsuit, but rather an arrangement to satisfy the administration's goals.
Others have also questioned how the administration would pay for this agreement and a second one reached with Ocean Winds, a global developer of offshore wind projects, which is a 50-50 joint venture between Engie and Portugal's EDP Renewables.
The CEO of TotalEnergies has defended the deal, highlighting the change in policies in the United States and the at-risk investments of the company. He said forfeiting nearly $1 billion was unacceptable to the company and that the monies being returned to the company are "our money."
Attentive Energy had proposed offshore energy projects to New York and New Jersey and submitted plans to the Department of the Interior and Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for review and approval. The first project would supply power to New York and the second to New Jersey, while plans for the North Carolina project were still in the development stage.
The other attorneys general highlight the regional impact of the cancellation of the projects. Massachusetts, for example, notes it routinely imports energy from New York to serve its growing energy demand. From January to April 2026, New England imported about seven percent of its energy load from New York.
Fuente: The Maritime Executive
