Core Summary

  • The U.S. Department of Energy admitted in a court filing submitted on July 15 that last year's decision to cancel $7.6 billion in clean energy grants was "based entirely on the political identity of the states where the recipients were located," a document first reported by The New York Times on Friday.
  • The Energy Department canceled 223 clean energy project grants in October 2025, all of which were located in states that voted for former Vice President Kamala Harris in the 2024 election. Some of the cancellations have been overturned in court.
  • Connecticut Democratic Representative Rosa DeLauro called the Energy Department's filing a "stunning admission" showing that the Trump administration is "weaponizing the federal grant process," and further warned that a proposal submitted by the Office of Management and Budget in May would normalize such practices.

In-Depth Analysis

Democratic lawmakers and advocacy groups are increasingly angered by the Trump administration's use of federal funds to advance its political agenda.

The Department of Homeland Security has proposed tying grants to states' willingness to assist with immigration enforcement. Additionally, the Office of Management and Budget proposed a new process in May that would give federal agencies greater control over federal grants.

The Energy Department acknowledged in its July 15 filing that the 2025 grant cancellations "were not based on any program, regulation, cost-saving, or performance factors... The grants included in the October notice batch were based entirely on the political identity of the states where the recipients were located, that is, whether the recipient's location and/or place of performance was in a blue state or a non-blue state."

Details about the grant cancellation process were part of an agreement by the Energy Department to avoid court discovery proceedings.

"This stunning admission by the Trump administration confirms what we have long known: they are weaponizing the federal grant process to punish those who did not vote for President Trump," DeLauro said in a statement. She noted that the administration is "attempting to take complete political control of the federal grant process and use it as a weapon to advance its ideological agenda."

The Sierra Club has pledged to continue fighting the Trump administration's "retaliatory agenda."

"The Trump administration is openly admitting its retaliatory approach to canceling much-needed energy infrastructure grants, ignoring the job losses, air pollution, and rising bills that people across the country are experiencing," Holly Bender, chief program officer of the Sierra Club, said in a statement.

On Friday, Colorado Democratic Representative Brittany Pettersen led a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers in calling on the Office of Management and Budget to withdraw its proposed changes to how federal grants are finalized.

In a letter to Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, Pettersen and her colleagues said the proposed rule "would fundamentally change how federal grants are awarded, shifting decision-making away from established neutral criteria."

"The rule would no longer rely on statutory requirements, agency expert review, and performance-based assessments, but instead allow appointed officials to decide which communities, agencies, and projects receive federal support. This represents a stark break from the long-standing Uniform Guidance," they wrote in the letter.

An Energy Department spokesperson told The New York Times that the initial review of the canceled 2025 grants was conducted without considering political factors.