Photo of Ben Cowan

Ben Cowan

Subscribe to Ben Cowan's Posts

Ben’s innovative solutions under the Endangered Species Act and other wildlife statutes have enabled renewable energy companies to drive major projects forward.

Follow:Read more about Ben CowanBen's Linkedin Profile

On December 22, 2025, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) issued short and nearly identical lease suspension orders that halted construction on five utility-scale offshore wind projects off Virginia, New York, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts, alleging new and classified national security threats. These suspensions sparked an immediate wave of litigation as the affected developers sought court orders that would allow them to resume work and keep to their carefully scripted construction timelines. Six weeks later, the dust has settled on a clean sweep for the offshore wind industry: all five projects won injunctions from four different judges in three different jurisdictions, appointed by one Democratic and two Republican presidents. Now that all construction of these projects is back on track, what lessons can we learn from this episode?

On Monday, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts struck down the freeze on federal permits for wind energy projects — a central component of the Wind Presidential Memorandum (the Wind Order) issued on the first day of the current administration. Judge Patti Saris’s opinion held that the Wind Order is arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and directed that it be vacated in full — meaning the ruling applies nationally. The decision was previewed in the court’s preliminary order in July indicating that the Wind Order was on shaky legal ground, citing a lack of administrative record to support the Wind Order and precedent from cases involving analogous moratoriums for offshore oil and gas. Despite the major win for wind, though, there is still significant uncertainty regarding how this administration will respond to the ruling and how it will affect wind energy permitting going forward.

Over the past decade, the definition of “waters of the United States” (WOTUS) has shifted repeatedly, creating uncertainty for permitting and project planning. Building on the Supreme Court’s Sackett v. EPA decision, the EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (together, the agencies) announced a proposal this week to further refine which water features qualify as WOTUS by narrowing key definitions and codifying — and expanding — exclusions. The proposal would apply across all Clean Water Act (CWA) programs that rely on WOTUS, including permitting under Sections 404 and 402, water quality certifications under Section 401, and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for impaired waters under Section 303. The proposal is directionally deregulatory, meaning fewer waters are likely to be considered federally jurisdictional and therefore regulated. The new definition was published in the Federal Register on Thursday, marking the start of a 45-day public comment period through January 5, 2026. The public comment page can be accessed here.

This article was republished in the December 2025 edition of E-Outlook, the Environmental & Natural Resources Section of the Oregon State Bar’s newsletter.

This week, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (collectively, the Services) proposed revisions to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) regulations that, if finalized, will generally restore the regulations adopted in 2019, during President Trump’s first term. The proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register on November 21, 2025, starting a 30-day public comment period that ends on December 21, 2025.

The frenetic pace of anti-renewable actions from the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) has continued into this week with the issuance of a new memorandum from Greg Wischer, deputy chief of staff for policy, directing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to ratchet up enforcement of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) against wind energy projects, and to scrutinize the eagle permit program that the FWS adopted in 2024 after many years of development.

During the week of July 28, the Trump administration unleashed a new burst of actions aimed squarely at blocking wind and solar energy with the announcement of two new secretarial orders (SO) and three new policies by the Department of the Interior (DOI), plus one from the Department of Transportation (DOT). These latest measures follow on the heels of the recent internal directive from DOI Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Gregory Wischer implementing three new levels of political review for a comprehensive list of approvals, consultations, and interim steps in the permitting processes for wind and solar projects with a nexus to DOI’s regulatory authority. Although couched in terms of curbing “preferential treatment” for wind energy, the measures go well beyond any leveling of the playing field, instead significantly disadvantaging wind and solar — which the DOI refers to as “foreign-controlled energy sources” — compared to other sources of energy or uses of public lands.

On June 17, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a proposed rule to approve Texas’s application for primary permitting and enforcement responsibility (primacy) for carbon dioxide (CO2) sequestration wells pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act’s (SDWA) Class VI Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program. Upon approval of the rule, the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) will have permitting and enforcement authority for the Class VI UIC program (with oversight from the EPA). This development is the culmination of lengthy negotiations between the state of Texas and the EPA, which we have previously discussed in more detail.

Much has been written in recent weeks about how the renewable energy industry in Texas dodged a bullet — several bullets actually — when three high-profile bills targeting the industry failed to pass in the recent legislative session that ended June 2. Indeed, each of those bills, S.B. 819, S.B. 388, and S.B. 715, would have had a substantial negative impact on renewable energy projects in Texas. For all the attention those bills garnered, however, and the justifiable relief felt by the industry after all three failed to pass, seemingly little attention has been paid to another bill, H.B. 3556, that did pass and was signed into law by Governor Abbot on June 22. This new law poses a serious threat to the prospects for future wind projects along the Texas coast.

On Monday, June 9, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) opened a short, 30-day public comment period soliciting information and comments to, “improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness” of Section 10(a) take permitting under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). If it seems like Section 10(a) just underwent a comment period not too long ago, that’s because it did. In 2023, under the Biden Administration, FWS solicited comments on proposed revisions to the regulations implementing that section, which were finalized last April. Now, the Trump Administration is seeking suggestions on how to further revise its ESA permitting rules.

On May 29, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado that dramatically changes the way courts scrutinize federal agencies’ environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing for a five-justice conservative majority (with Justice Neil Gorsuch abstaining), held that (a) courts must afford federal agencies “substantial judicial deference” regarding both the scope and contents of their environmental analyses; and (b) courts do not need to consider the effects of the action to the extent they are “separate in time or place” from the proposed project. The ruling gives federal agencies permission to greatly streamline their NEPA analyses at a time when those agencies are rapidly being drained of their resources and facing increasing pressure to expedite lengthy permitting processes.