Offshore Wind Projects Find Success in U.S. Courts
On December 22, 2025 the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management ("BOEM") issued an order suspending all ongoing activities related to five offshore wind projects in the development stage for 90 days citing national security concerns (the "Suspension Orders"). The projects are off the coast of New York, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and Virginia, and have expected capacities ranging from 700 MW to over 2 GW. Each of the project developers challenged the stop work order, stating that the order was arbitrary and capricious, procedurally unlawful, and irreparably harmful. By February 2, 2026, all of the projects obtained preliminary injunctions.
BOEM Issuance of Suspension Orders
BOEM grounded its suspensions in its 30 C.F.R. § 585.417(b) regulatory authority to issue a 90‑day suspension. BOEM framed its actions as necessary to address "new" or "additional" classified national security information from the Department of Defense/Department of War, emphasizing the East Coast projects' sensitive locations and the risk of serious, immediate, and irreparable harm.
Across projects, BOEM argued that national security concerns were paramount and that BOEM possessed broad discretion under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act of 1953 to suspend project activities based on newly developed classified assessments. It asserted that the agency's judgments should receive deference and that courts should not second‑guess classified determinations in preliminary injunction proceedings.
Developers' Efforts to Obtain Preliminary Injunctions and Temporary Restraining Orders
Each of the projects challenged the Suspension Orders, arguing that the orders were arbitrary and capricious. The developers argued that the Suspension Orders were arbitrary and capricious because they rested on conclusory national security assertions that conflicted with prior, multi-year approvals and agency positions confirming no national security interference. The Suspension Orders provided no details on the concerns, and BOEM refused to provide any further information.
The developers also challenged the procedure as unlawful. The Suspension Orders were sent with no notice or prior hearing and provided no reasoning other than the assertion of "impacts to national security from offshore wind projects." The developers pointed to the notice requirement in 30 C.F.R. § 585.106(b)-(c) and their own lease agreements with BOEM. BOEM also did not provide any opportunity for the developers to correct the concern.
Finally, the developers contended that irreparable harm would result from the Suspension Orders. The developers emphasized the sunk cost of the projects, with one project already almost 90% complete, along with scheduling windows and power purchase agreements that could be violated by delay.
Court Issuance of Preliminary Injunctions
Courts have proven receptive to the developers' arguments. Each of the Suspension Orders have now been enjoined. Courts emphasized the likely arbitrary and capricious nature of the Suspension Orders, stating that BOEM failed to explain what "new" national security concerns justified reversing years of interagency consultation and previously approved mitigation agreements, or why construction could not continue while concerns were addressed. The courts pointed to a disconnect in allowing other completed turbines to operate when the government's rationale was concerned with operation and not construction. Likewise, courts showed concern with the lack of notice provided and the irreparable harm that would likely result.
Subject projects will now be allowed to continue construction while the cases play out. Industry actors should follow these proceedings to understand how courts may interpret further actions by federal agencies targeting wind energy projects based on direction from presidential executive orders.
