A US federal judge has ruled that the Danish energy company Ørsted to restart work on its Revolution Wind project near Rhode Island, which had been paused by the US government last month. The ruling marks an important legal moment in the ongoing dispute over offshore wind development in US federal waters.
The case centers on whether the federal government had the legal authority to halt construction so late in the project. The court decided that stopping the work would cause serious harm to the developer and was not properly justified under existing laws. As a result, construction can move forward again after weeks of uncertainty.
Federal pause on offshore wind projects challenged in court
In late December, the US Interior Department ordered a suspension of five offshore wind projects. The government said the pause was needed because of national security concerns. These concerns were based on classified information shared by the defense department in November. The government did not publicly explain how offshore wind projects could threaten national security.
The suspension affected several large projects along the US East Coast. These projects involve billions of dollars in investment and years of planning. Developers and some US states quickly challenged the decision in court. They argued that the sudden pause broke federal rules and created serious financial damage.
The Revolution Wind project was one of the projects affected by the suspension. The project is located off the coast of Rhode Island and is designed to provide clean electricity to homes and businesses in the region. At the time of the pause, the project was already about 87 percent complete. Ørsted said it was losing around one and a half million dollars each day while construction remained stopped.
During the court hearing, government lawyers defended the pause. They said the decision was necessary to protect national security and was based on new information that could not be made public. However, the judge questioned why a nearly finished project should be stopped without allowing the developer to review or respond to the classified concerns.
The court found that the government had not followed proper administrative procedures. It also found that the developer had been denied basic due process. Because of this, the judge granted an injunction that allows construction to resume while the legal case continues.
The Revolution Wind project of Ørsted and its role in US clean energy
Revolution Wind is a large offshore wind project planned to operate in federal waters near Rhode Island. It is designed to generate clean energy by using powerful ocean winds. The project is expected to begin producing electricity later this year, according to the developer.
The project is owned by Revolution Wind LLC, a joint venture between Ørsted and Skyborn Renewables. Skyborn Renewables is part of a global infrastructure investment group. Together, the companies have invested heavily in planning, equipment, and construction over several years.
Offshore wind projects like Revolution Wind play a key role in US clean energy goals. They are meant to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and cut carbon emissions. Coastal states have supported these projects because they can provide large amounts of renewable energy without using land space.
However, offshore wind development has faced political and legal challenges. The previous US administration openly criticized wind power. It described wind turbines as unattractive, costly, and ineffective. During that time, offshore wind developers experienced repeated disruptions, delays, and regulatory uncertainty.
Ørsted has been among the companies most affected by these disruptions. In addition to Revolution Wind, the company has also taken legal action related to another project called Sunrise Wind, located off the coast of New York. Other developers, including companies behind projects near New York and Virginia, have also filed lawsuits challenging the federal suspension.
The hearing involving Revolution Wind was the first of three similar court hearings scheduled this week. The other cases involve offshore wind projects planned near New York and Virginia. All of these cases focus on whether the federal government acted lawfully when it ordered the sudden pause.
Court decision highlights legal limits on government action
The judge ruled that stopping Revolution Wind without clear legal grounds would cause lasting damage to the project. The court noted that construction delays at such a late stage could lead to financial losses, contract issues, and long-term harm that could not easily be undone.
The ruling also emphasized that federal agencies must follow established laws when making major decisions. These laws require transparency, fairness, and clear reasoning. Even when national security is cited, the government must still respect basic legal standards.
South Korea targets Canada’s $60 trillion submarine deal with sweeping industrial and energy offer
In this case, the court found that the developer had no chance to review the classified claims or defend itself. This lack of process raised serious legal concerns. As a result, the judge allowed construction to restart while the broader legal questions remain under review.
There was no immediate public response from the interior department following the ruling. Ørsted also did not issue a statement right away. Construction activity on the project is now permitted to continue under the court’s order.
The decision represents a significant moment for offshore wind developers in the United States. It shows that courts can intervene when projects are halted without clear legal justification. At the same time, it keeps the focus on existing laws rather than political opinions about renewable energy.
For now, work on the Revolution Wind project near Rhode Island is moving forward again. The ruling applies only to this specific project, but similar legal arguments are being tested in other courts this week. The outcomes of those cases will determine whether other paused offshore wind projects can also resume construction under similar conditions.
