Urgent.News

What's breaking now, across thousands of outlets.

World

A federal judge just told Trump there’s no “emergency” to justify keeping a Michigan coal plant open

It's one of the first successful legal challenges to the administration’s “energy emergency” agenda.

Abstract editorial illustration

A federal judge declared on Friday that the Department of Energy overstepped when it ordered the J.H Campbell coal-fired power plant in Michigan to remain operational beyond its scheduled retirement date. The plant, one of seven fossil-fueled facilities targeted by the Trump administration, faced legal challenges due to its substantial environmental impact and high operational costs.

In May, the Energy Department invoked emergency powers under the Federal Power Act to keep the 64-year-old plant running, citing concerns over potential power outages and the need for increased energy for data centers. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed this rationale, stating the emergency statute is a "narrow, last-resort backstop."

The court's ruling marks one of the first legal setbacks for the administration's utilization of "energy emergency" powers, emphasizing that while an "energy emergency" can be proclaimed, the practical actions permissible under the law depend on factual and legal considerations. Despite the court's decision, the Michigan plant has emitted significant pollutants, contributing to a projected 100 new asthma cases among nearby residents.

The utility, Consumers Energy Company, has sought to recoup $259 million in costs associated with the plant's extended operation from customers in Michigan and ten other states. The ruling sets a precedent that genuine emergencies must exist for such extensions to continue. Environmental groups involved in the lawsuit, including the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council, anticipate that the administration may challenge the ruling, potentially leading to additional delays or a review by the Supreme Court.

This decision highlights the tension between the administration's support for fossil fuel interests and its purported commitment to renewable energy energy projects, such as offshore wind energy, which faced funding cuts in mid-August.

Written by urgent.news from Grist's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.

Also reported by 10 other outlets

Read the original at grist.org →

More in World

More from Friday 11 September →