){kind=link}
The Trump administration is facing fresh scrutiny after court documents alleged that more than $7.5 billion (around ₹65,000 crore) in federal grants for clean energy projects were cancelled primarily due to political considerations rather than policy or performance.
According to a report by The New York Times, the grants were revoked in October after the administration stated it was protecting taxpayers from wasteful spending. However, subsequent court filings by government lawyers reportedly revealed that the Department of Energy (DOE) did not base its decision on programme performance, statutory obligations, cost savings, or other policy-related criteria.
Instead, the filing claimed that the grants were chosen based on “the political identity of the grant recipient’s state,” including whether the project was located in or planned for a Democratic-leaning state.
The affected projects were largely situated in states represented by Democratic lawmakers and in states won by Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party’s 2024 presidential nominee.
Department Of Energy Rejects Political Bias Allegation
The Department of Energy has disputed the interpretation of the court filing, maintaining that the grant cancellations were not politically motivated.
A department spokesperson said the references to political considerations were related only to the timing of the announcement, not the actual decisions to terminate funding. The clarification was reported by The Guardian.
Lawsuit Challenges Cancellation Of Biden-Era Grants
The controversy stems from a lawsuit filed by six University of California academics and several researchers, who challenged the cancellation of research grants awarded during the Biden administration by multiple federal agencies.
The plaintiffs argue that the grant terminations were part of a broader political cost-cutting initiative and an ideological campaign carried out by the administration.
White House Seeks Greater Control Over Federal Funding
The dispute comes as the White House pushes for expanded authority over how federal grants are distributed.
Under a proposed regulation published on May 29, political appointees would receive greater oversight of discretionary grant awards and could block or withdraw funding that does not align with the president’s policy priorities.
The proposed rule states that discretionary grants should, where applicable, “demonstrably advance the President’s policy priorities,” according to The Guardian.
Critics argue that the proposal could allow the administration to withhold congressionally approved funding based on political or ideological considerations, raising concerns about the future independence of federal grant allocation.