Judge Mehta Rules Trump’s Energy Cuts Violated Constitution, Targeted Blue States

India-West News Desk

WASHINGTON, DC –  U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta on January 12 delivered a sharp rebuke to the Trump administration, ruling that its decision to cancel billions of dollars in federal energy grants crossed a constitutional line by politicizing federal funding instead of administering it for the benefit of all Americans.

In a 17-page opinion, Judge Mehta found that the Department of Energy violated the Fifth Amendment’s equal protection guarantee when it terminated roughly $8 billion in energy and climate-related grants based largely on the political affiliation of the states receiving them. The ruling orders the department to reinstate seven specific grants totaling $27.6 million, part of a broader sweep of more than 200 projects canceled during an October 2025 government shutdown.

At the center of Mehta’s decision was his conclusion that the federal government cannot use its spending power as a political weapon. He wrote that there is no constitutional exception that allows an administration to distribute or withhold federal funds based on whether states supported the president at the ballot box. The Constitution, he emphasized, requires the executive branch to serve all Americans, not just those in politically aligned states.

Judge Mehta pointed to evidence showing that nearly every terminated grant was located in a state that did not support President Donald Trump in the 2024 election. During the case, the Department of Energy acknowledged that whether a project was located in a blue state was a key factor in the cancellations. Mehta rejected the administration’s argument that such decisions were shielded by executive discretion, stating that equal protection principles apply fully to federal funding decisions.

The lawsuit was brought by the city of St. Paul, Minnesota, along with several environmental organizations. They argued that Democratic leaning states were systematically targeted while similar projects in Republican leaning states were left untouched. The record before the court showed stark disparities, with hundreds of millions of dollars in funding cut from states like Minnesota and Hawaii, while comparable projects in Montana and Georgia continued.