Beach Town Poised to Use Green Left’s Favorite Legal Strategy Against Massive Offshore Wind Project

From THE DAILY CALLER

Nick Pope
Contributor

The town of Nantucket, Massachusetts looks set to use one of the green left’s go-to legal strategies against a massive offshore wind farm supported by liberal environmentalists.

Environmental groups have used “sue and settle” tactics — wherein plaintiffs sue an aligned administration to kill a disfavored project, which the aligned administration effectively does via settlement — for decades to impede infrastructure projects they oppose. Now, Nantucket is suing the Trump administration and alleging that key procedural laws were not followed in Biden-era approvals for the massive SouthCoast wind farm off the island’s coast, teeing up a potential “sue and settle” situation that could derail a major project supported by the green left.

Nantucket’s lawsuit, filed Thursday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, names Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) as defendants, even though the Trump administration was not in power when the government approved SouthCoast Wind’s paperwork. If completed, the SouthCoast project will feature up to 147 massive wind turbine generators across a 199-square mile lease area located about 20 miles south of Nantucket. (RELATED: ‘David And Goliath’: Offshore Wind Opponents Ecstatic With Trump’s Day One Assault Against Industry)

Nantucket OSW Lawsuit by Nick Pope on Scribd

The small island community argues that the Biden administration violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act on its way to greenlighting the development. Contrary to the Biden administration, the Trump administration is no friend of the offshore wind industry: President Donald Trump railed against offshore wind on the campaign trail, and some of his first acts upon taking office in January included temporarily withdrawing offshore wind lease areas and initiating a review of federal permitting for offshore wind.

“In a perfect world, of course there would be no ‘sue and settle.’ But we don’t live in a perfect world,” Steve Milloy, a senior policy fellow with the Energy and Environmental Legal Institute, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Unfortunately, the left has put us in this war-like situation where extreme, extra-Constitutional means need to be used. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. I think it’s excellent.”

Craig Rucker, president of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), told the DCNF that lawsuits like the one in Nantucket will provide the Trump administration easy opportunities t0 implement its anti-offshore wind agenda. CFACT is engaged in its own similar lawsuit against the government to try to stop the massive Dominion Energy offshore wind development off the Virginia coast.

“Clearly, it’s a real opportunity for the Trump administration to take advantage of citizen outrage over offshore wind. From our perspective, it would be welcomed if the Trump administration will settle with these people out of court and put an end to that project,” Rucker told the DCNF. “From our perspective, the Trump administration settling with these people in Massachusetts would be a good precedent, and we’d like to see the same thing happen in Virginia.”

Nantucket’s suit alleges specifically that the Biden BOEM “bypassed or shortchanged numerous required steps, shirked its responsibility to the public, and allowed corporate energy developers to dictate the terms of permitting.” Notably, Amanda Lefton — who ran BOEM for the Biden administration from February 2021 to February 2023 — went to work for a major offshore wind company several months after leaving the federal government.

Nantucket became a hotbed of anti-offshore wind activism after a turbine created by a different project in the region, Vineyard Wind, malfunctioned and shed debris into the surrounding waters. Some of that pollution later washed up on Nantucket’s beaches, forcing closures and enraging many locals.

Despite the environmental damage caused by supposedly green technology, many environmental groups subsequently defended the industry. More generally, many green groups support offshore wind as a means to fight climate change, even though many critics are concerned that offshore wind development may be responsible for the surge in whale deaths observed along the East Coast in recent years.

SouthCoast Wind did not respond to a request for comment.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

4.9 19 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

23 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bruce Cobb
March 30, 2025 6:27 pm

Irony can be so. Ironic.

Scissor
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 30, 2025 8:08 pm

There was nowhere with a higher percentage of democrats than in Nantucket, but it finally took Trump in power to say, “enough is enough.” 🙂

Bryan A
Reply to  Scissor
March 30, 2025 9:23 pm

It is much more than about time to use their own playbook against them

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 31, 2025 2:47 am

Just like all the Tree huggers buying Tesla’s and now burn them out of outrage over Musk cutting waste and fraud…. just shows you what mental illness looks like in the wild.

MarkW
Reply to  BOB54
March 31, 2025 7:15 am

That’s just it, they aren’t burning their own Teslas, they are burning other people’s Teslas.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
March 31, 2025 5:43 am

That’s why I take irony supplements.

March 30, 2025 6:35 pm

Will DOI be conflicted here – does it have an obligation to permit holders? Surely rescinding permits would come with an obligation to compensate.

If Australia gets an LNP government, the current power system capacity contracts could come under scrutiny. But these are similar to guaranteed subsidies under the inflation reduction act rather than permits. Trump has said that any approved projects under the IRA will continue but no more approved.

MarkW
Reply to  RickWill
March 31, 2025 7:16 am

If it turns out the permit was issued fraudulently, there is no obligation to compensate.

March 30, 2025 6:37 pm

Gee, almost as hypocritical as the ‘progressives’ on Martha’s Vineyard, who called out MA’s National Guard when 50 Venezuelans set foot on their island.

March 30, 2025 9:18 pm

The problem with “what goes around, comes around” is that it does so again. Its like packing the Supreme Court. The next government would just pack it more.

While I’d like to see windfarms meet the death they so richly deserve, I’d also like to see an end to sue and settle. Entrenching it means it will be used for steadily more extreme goals over time. Killing both windfarms and sue and settle is a more difficult task, but the better strategy long term.

Reply to  davidmhoffer
March 31, 2025 4:41 am

Sure, but maybe after the Dems see it used against them- they’ll agree that it should be ended.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
March 31, 2025 7:13 am

Unless the lawyers donate 10% to the Big Guy.

MarkW
Reply to  davidmhoffer
March 31, 2025 7:19 am

As long as it’s only used by the left, on their enemies, they will never agree to solve the problem. It’s only once they have realized that it’s a weapon that can be used against them as well, will they agree to it’s elimination.

Ed Zuiderwijk
March 31, 2025 1:22 am

The irony is palpable, but it is also a missed opportunity. Those wind farms do nothing, absolutely nothing, to prevent ‘man made climate change’, which is a fiction. It would be helpful if an opportunity arose where that simple fact could be spelled out in a court of law.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
March 31, 2025 2:22 am

Exactly.
The goal isn’t to produce power, it’s to reduce CO2.

The nameplate rating would also include a number denoting the reduction in global temperature.

That’s the real net zero.

Reply to  David Pentland
March 31, 2025 5:47 am

The goal is to reduce carbon – carbon based lifeforms like us.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Brad-DXT
March 31, 2025 7:14 am

Not all. Just the deplorables, which is 99.99% of the planet’s population.

March 31, 2025 2:59 am

The Wind and Solar energy companies are just like Big Pharma who get special treatment with producing vaccines, where there’s NO LIABILTY if they are proven to cause damage to their patients.

These so called “energy companies” need to be held accountable to the promises they make based on their promises of reducing CO² after accounting for the excess CO² expended during the building of these ill-conceived monstrosities. But more importantly they should be forced to issue bonds to cover all future costs to the taxpayers in both money and the environment when they fail to meet their promised claims.

2hotel9
March 31, 2025 4:13 am

Really?!?! They supported wind while Biden was in, now they oppose wind simply because Trump is in? Really?

J Boles
March 31, 2025 6:09 am
Mr.
March 31, 2025 8:06 am

Well call me Ishmael!

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Mr.
March 31, 2025 11:51 am

Would that not be Mr. Ishmael?

ResourceGuy
March 31, 2025 12:49 pm

Okay, settle in the form of dismantling plans.