Trump and Zeldin’s Defamation and Lawlessness Against Clean Energy Exposed in Court
tags
Washington, D.C. – This week, a federal judge found that the Trump EPA’s unlawful attacks on Congressionally appropriated Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund grants for low-cost energy are illegal, and that the EPA has “no rational explanation” for terminating the grants. As a CNN headline put it, “Judge rules against Trump admin after it couldn’t find evidence of fraud in clean energy program.”
Having repeatedly reproached Trump’s EPA and DOJ for producing no evidence of wrongdoing throughout the proceedings, U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan made an even more sweeping denunciation in her opinion, saying “The integrity of government actions depends not only on the decisions made but on the consistent and lawful execution of those decisions.”
But Trump and Zeldin won’t let up on their obsessive crusade against affordable energy, and now the funds are illegally paused again, with families, communities, and contractors stuck waiting for money to come through for local projects like major solar farms for rural communities or energy efficiency upgrades for homes and schools.
This is all the more alarming given well-reported turmoil at the Department of Justice, where Zeldin has allegedly colluded with Director Kash Patel’s FBI to stir up political investigations of the grant program in order to justify clawing back congressionally-appropriated and legally obligated funds. Here, too, their lack of evidence blew up in their faces, with the resignation of a senior, respected DOJ prosecutor after she refused to go along with the scheme.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration has fostered an alternate reality in conservative media, alleging waste, fraud, and abuse, even as they have failed to produce a shred of evidence in court. As of March 31, Fox News had aired at least 56 segments on the topic, highlighting Zeldin and the Trump administration’s claims of corruption that courts have repeatedly debunked. Zeldin even went on Fox the day after a federal judge first ruled against the EPA, in part for failing to provide any evidence of fraud or wrongdoing, to repeat his baseless claims.
The EPA on Fox News vs the EPA in Court
EPA Administrator Zeldin on Fox News
Zeldin: “I would say that it’s a clear-cut case of waste and abuse. The entire scheme, in my opinion, is criminal.” [Fox News, Sunday Morning Futures, 2/23/25]
The EPA In Court
EPA: “EPA did not terminate for Plaintiffs’ noncompliance… EPA’s bases for termination were the grants’ structure and terms, including the changes to those terms made in the twilight of the prior administration, and not conduct of Plaintiffs for which they could use the opportunity to object to explain or justify.”
[EPA filing, 3/26/25]
Judge Chutkan: “Here we are, weeks in, and you’re still unable to proffer me any evidence with regard to malfeasance.”
[April 2 hearing]
Judge Chutkan: “Tell me, can you proffer to me the evidence of commission of a violation of federal criminal law involving fraud, conflict of interest, bribery, or gratuity violations? Any one of those things?”
DOJ Attorney Sacks: “I cannot, Your Honor.”
[April 2 hearing]
EPA Administrator Zeldin on Fox News
Jesse Watters: “Is this a kickback, is it theft, is it graft? What would you call it?”
Zeldin: “All of the above.”
[Fox News, Jesse Watters Primetime, 3/6/25]
The EPA In Court
Judge Chutkan: “Though repeatedly pressed on the issue, EPA offers no rational explanation for why it suspended the grants and then immediately terminated the entire NCIF and CCIA grant programs overnight. Nor has EPA offered any rational explanation for why it needed to cancel the grants to safeguard taxpayer resources, especially when it had begun examining the grant programs to add oversight mechanisms, or why it needed to cancel every single grant to review some aspects of the GGRF program with which it was concerned.” [Judge Chutkan, April 16 opinion]
Judge Chutkan: “When agencies fail to operate within the bounds of the law—whether through breaching agreements, arbitrary decision-making, or ignoring regulations—they erode public trust, materially affect the rights and interests of individuals and organizations, and undermine confidence in the very institutions meant to serve the people… The integrity of government actions depends not only on the decisions made but on the consistent and lawful execution of those decisions.” [Judge Chutkan, April 16 opinion]