Ørsted Sues US Agency Over Halted $5 Billion Offshore Wind Project

Denmark-based renewable energy major Ørsted has moved a U.S. District Court to challenge a civil order that halted construction of its nearly completed Revolution Wind coastal design, just weeks before it was listed to begin supplying electricity. The legal action, filed by Ørsted’s common adventure with Skyborn Renewables, contests a work cessation directive issued by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) under the Trump administration.

The Revolution Wind design, located off the seacoast of Rhode Island, represents an investment of roughly $5 billion and is 87% complete, according to Ørsted. The 704 MW installation was anticipated to start generating power as early as January 2026, supplying clean electricity to more than 350,000 homes in Connecticut and Rhode Island under long-term power purchase agreements.

Legal Challenge Against Unforeseen Work cessation

Ørsted’s complaint argues that the BOEM order is unlawful and unjustified, particularly given the advanced stage of construction and the expansive nonsupervisory blessings formerly secured. The work cessation forms part of a broader pause blazoned in December by the Trump administration, which set plats for all large-scale coastal wind systems under construction in the United States. The administration cited “public security pitfalls” as the basis for the decision.

The pause affects five major coastal wind developments along the U.S. East Coast, representing nearly 6 GW of planned generation capacity. These systems were inclusively anticipated to enter marketable operation over the coming two times, contributing significantly to indigenous clean energy targets and grid trustability.

National Security Claims Under Scrutiny

Ørsted has explosively disputed the public security explanation behind the suspense. The company emphasized that Revolution Wind passed times of discussion with the U.S. Department of Defense, including the Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse. These conversations redounded in a formal mitigation agreement involving the Department of War, the Department of the Air Force, and the design inventors.

In addition to defense-related concurrences, the design entered blessings from multiple civil agencies, including the U.S. Coast Guard, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the National Marine Fisheries Service. Ørsted said the design complied completely with all nonsupervisory conditions and addressed enterprises raised during the review process.

Pattern of Legal and Policy Reversals

The current suspense marks the alternate attempt by the administration to halt Revolution Wind. In August 2025, BOEM issued an analogous stop-work order, which was capsized by a civil court the following month. In those proceedings, Ørsted bared that billions of bones
had formerly been spent or contractually committed to the design, emphasizing the fiscal stakes involved.

The rearmost order also follows a broader policy move by President Trump, who inked a presidential memorandum on his first day in office halting civil blessings for wind energy systems. That directive was lately struck down by a U.S. civil court, which ruled that the action was arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law.

Assiduity, pushback, and resemblant suits

Ørsted’s legal action comes shortly after Dominion Energy filed an analogous action challenging the suspension of its Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (CVOW) design, the largest among those affected. Dominion rejected the administration’s public security defense and suggested the decision reflected an unsupported bias against wind energy.

Together, these cases punctuate growing resistance from energy inventors and serviceability against abrupt policy shifts that hang large-scale structure investments. Assiduity stakeholders argue that a nonsupervisory query could undermine investor confidence and decelerate the U.S. transition to cleaner energy sources.

Economic and Energy Counteraccusations

Revolution Wind is seen as a foundational design for coastal wind development in the northeastern United States. Beyond supplying electricity to hundreds of thousands of homes, the design has supported jobs across manufacturing, construction, and harbor structure. A prolonged suspense could delay profitable benefits and disrupt state-position clean energy pretensions in Rhode Island and Connecticut.

Ørsted stated that it and its mates reckoned on a thorough and total review process before committing capital to the design. The company advised that reversing blessings at such a late stage has pitfalls, setting a precedent that could discourage future renewable energy investments.

Outlook for Sunrise Wind and Unborn Action

In addition to Revolution Wind, Ørsted also owns the Sunrise Wind design off the seacoast of New York, which has been broken under the same BOEM order. The company verified that it's assessing legal options to address the suspension of that design as well.

As the court battle unfolds, the outgrowth is anticipated to have significant counteraccusations for the U.S. coastal wind sector. A ruling in Ørsted’s favor could reaffirm the stability of the civil permitting process, while an extended pause could reshape the line of coastal renewable energy development in the country.