WASHINGTON – In a significant legal decision, a federal judge has invalidated former President Donald Trump’s executive order that aimed to block wind energy projects. The ruling, handed down on Monday, found Trump’s effort to suspend nearly all leasing of wind farms on federal lands and waters to be “arbitrary and capricious,” thereby contravening U.S. law.

Presiding over the case was Judge Patti Saris of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. She nullified the executive order, which had been issued on January 20, and deemed it unlawful. This judicial decision marks a pivotal moment for wind energy proponents.

The case was brought forth by a coalition of state attorneys general from 17 states and Washington, D.C., under the leadership of New York Attorney General Letitia James. They contested Trump’s inaugural day order that effectively placed a moratorium on leasing and permitting for wind energy initiatives.

Trump’s administration has been known for its opposition to renewable energy, particularly offshore wind projects, often favoring fossil fuels as the primary source of electricity generation.

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell celebrated the court’s decision as a triumph for the advancement of green jobs and the renewable energy sector. This ruling is seen as a beacon of hope for the future of sustainable energy development in the United States.

“Massachusetts has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into offshore wind, and today, we successfully protected those important investments from the Trump administration’s unlawful order,” Campbell said in a statement.

James said she was grateful the court stepped in “to block the administration’s reckless and unlawful crusade against clean energy.”

“As New Yorkers face rising energy costs, we need more energy sources, not fewer,” James said. “Wind energy is good for our environment, our economy, and our communities.”

The coalition that opposed Trump’s order argued that Trump doesn’t have the authority to halt project permitting, and that doing so jeopardizes the states’ economies, energy mix, public health and climate goals.

The coalition includes Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington state and Washington, D.C. They say they’ve invested hundreds of millions of dollars collectively to develop wind energy and even more on upgrading transmission lines to bring wind energy to the electrical grid.

The government argued that the states’ claims amount to nothing more than a policy disagreement over preferences for wind versus fossil fuel energy development that is outside the federal court’s jurisdiction. Justice Department lawyer Michael Robertson said in court that the wind order paused permitting, but didn’t halt it, while Interior Secretary Doug Burgum reviews the environmental impact of wind projects.

The executive order said there were “alleged legal deficiencies underlying the federal government’s leasing and permitting” of wind projects under the Biden administration.

A previous judge in the case allowed it to proceed against Burgum, but dismissed an action against Trump and other Cabinet secretaries. Judge William Young allowed the states to proceed with claims that blocking permits for wind energy projects violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which outlines a detailed process for enacting regulations, but not the Constitution.

Wind is the United States’ largest source of renewable energy, providing about 10% of the electricity generated in the nation, according to the American Clean Power Association.

The Interior Department and the White House didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment, but the White House previously accused the Democratic attorneys general of using lawfare to stop the president’s energy agenda.

Marguerite Wells, executive director of the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, said wind energy is a key component of powering the nation’s electric grid.

Wind “is currently one of the most cost-effective ways to generate power and is being used successfully not only in the United States, but across the world,” she said. “With this ruling behind us, projects can now be judged on their merits. We thank the attorneys general who helped us get this case over the finish line.”

Kit Kennedy of the Natural Resources Defense Council called the decision a win for consumers, union workers, U.S. businesses, clean air and the climate.

“From the beginning of its time in office, the Trump administration put a halt to the wind energy projects that are needed to keep utility bills in check and the grid reliable,” Kennedy said.

The wind order “has been a devastating blow to workers, electricity customers, and the reliability of the power grid,” she said, adding that the Trump administration “should use this (ruling) as a wake-up call, stop its illegal actions and get out of the way of the expansion of renewable energy.”

___ The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.