Marley KakusaA federal judge has overturned the Trump administration’s cancellation of the $7 billion Solar for All program, ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency lacked the legal authority to terminate grants that had already been awarded.
U.S. District Judge Mary S. McElroy of the District of Rhode Island issued the decision on September 18, granting summary judgment to a coalition of workers, solar businesses, nonprofits and other plaintiffs challenging the EPA’s termination of the program. McElroy, who was appointed to the federal bench by President Donald Trump during his first term, declared the termination unlawful under the Administrative Procedure Act and ordered it vacated.
The ruling revives a major federal initiative created to expand residential and community solar access for low-income and disadvantaged households across the United States.
Solar for All ruling finds EPA exceeded its authority
Solar for All was established through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 as part of the broader Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
Congress appropriated $7 billion for competitive grants to states, municipalities, Tribal governments and eligible nonprofit organizations. The EPA subsequently selected 60 grant recipients in 2024 to establish or expand programs providing residential solar, community solar and related technologies to households that otherwise might have difficulty accessing them.
The EPA originally estimated that the program could benefit more than 900,000 households, generate at least $350 million in annual electricity-bill savings and support approximately 200,000 jobs and workforce-training opportunities. Those figures were agency projections rather than measured outcomes.
The Trump administration moved to terminate Solar for All in August 2025 after Congress passed legislation repealing the statutory provision that had created the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at the time that the agency would no longer implement the program and sought to rescind remaining funds.
The central legal question was whether that repeal also authorized EPA to cancel grants that had already been obligated.
McElroy concluded that it did not.
In her ruling, the judge found that Congress had provided separate administrative funding through 2031, demonstrating an expectation that EPA would continue administering grants that had already been awarded. She concluded that the agency acted contrary to law and exceeded its statutory authority when it terminated the program.
The court therefore vacated EPA’s termination decision.
Lawsuit challenged 2025 cancellation
The case was brought by plaintiffs including the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, Rhode Island Center for Justice, Solar United Neighbors, an individual homeowner and several solar businesses.
They argued that terminating Solar for All threatened projects, employment and planned investments that depended on the federal grants.
The ruling did not grant every form of relief requested by the plaintiffs. McElroy declined to issue a separate permanent injunction against EPA, determining that vacating the agency’s termination decision was sufficient based on the government’s representations to the court.
That distinction is important. The court invalidated EPA’s decision to terminate Solar for All, effectively restoring the program’s legal status, but did not issue an additional injunction dictating every step the agency must take to administer the grants.
EPA considers appeal
The EPA said following the decision that it was reviewing the ruling and considering its options for an appeal.
The dispute over Solar for All forms part of a broader legal battle surrounding the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund.
The original fund totaled approximately $27 billion, with $7 billion allocated to Solar for All and roughly $20 billion directed through the National Clean Investment Fund and Clean Communities Investment Accelerator.
Those other programs have faced separate litigation after the Trump administration sought to terminate their grants. In August, a federal appeals court ruled that the administration had improperly terminated the approximately $20 billion in grants awarded to nonprofit organizations selected to finance clean-energy and emissions-reduction projects.
For Solar for All recipients, the September 18 decision removes the EPA termination that had halted the program. The immediate implementation of the grants, however, could still be affected by additional court proceedings if the administration appeals the ruling.
Follow related solar policy developments in Sunhub’s Latest News.
Sources
- U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, Rhode Island AFL-CIO v. EPA ruling
- Reuters, EPA unlawfully terminated $7 billion solar grant program, judge rules
- Associated Press, federal judge rules on Solar for All termination
- U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund
- EPA, original Solar for All award announcement and program projections
- Solar Power World
Daniyal Ahmed
Cody Cooper
Add comment