On Tuesday, environmental organizations faced a setback as they sought access to a $16 billion grant that had been put on hold by the Trump administration earlier this year.
A three-judge panel from the DC Court of Appeals determined, in a split ruling, that the Trump administration had the authority to freeze $20 billion from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, established during the Biden administration, which was meant for eight specific groups.
“Some recipients might have to shut down their operations while this legal battle unfolds, but the impact on them doesn’t outweigh the government’s need to properly manage billions of taxpayer dollars,” the court stated.
The appeal court indicated it lacked jurisdiction over the case and directed the plaintiffs to address their claims in federal court. This decision reversed a lower court’s ruling that had permitted some access to the funds during the ongoing legal proceedings.
Judges Neomi Rao and Gregory Cassas, both appointed by Trump, formed the majority, while Judge Nina Pillard, who was appointed by Obama, dissented.
Pillard expressed concern, stating, “The majority allows the government to seize the plaintiffs’ funds based on dubious claims while enforcing significant administrative laws permanently.”
The funds held by Citibank were frozen following claims by EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, suggesting that the allocations had been quietly arranged to benefit Biden and left-leaning organizations.
At the time, Zeldin cited a video from the conservative group Project Veritas, where a Treasury official made questionable comments related to the funding.
Initially, Biden’s administration allocated $2 billion to eight environmental organizations under the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, targeting initiatives like solar panel installations and boosting energy efficiency in buildings. Prior to the freezing of funds, tens of millions had already been disbursed to various groups.
Beth Bafford, CEO of Climate United, expressed disappointment over the ruling, stating, “We are disheartened by the panel’s decision, but—we must contend with the case’s merits. The EPA has unlawfully halted funds that were explicitly mandated.”
This situation presents yet another hurdle in their efforts to lower energy costs for the vulnerable while creating jobs for American workers, but they remain committed to supporting communities that are meant to benefit from affordable and clean energy. “This is not the end of our journey,” Bafford emphasized.
In contrast, an EPA spokesperson praised the ruling, calling it a victory for reason. “It’s encouraging to see rationality prevail in the judicial system,” the spokesperson noted, highlighting the agency’s responsibility to manage taxpayer money effectively.
The spokesman stated that Zeldin had halted the grants due to significant concerns surrounding conflicts of interest and self-dealing, as well as questions about the eligibility of the recipients. “Those who sought these grants were mistaken about jurisdiction and acted as if they had a right to these taxpayer funds,” they concluded.
