Environment

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the California Energy Commission (CEC) today sent a Notice of Intent to Sue targeting an unlawful agreement between the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) and RWE U.S. Offshore (RWE) that would undermine California’s offshore wind energy development. Under the agreement, DOI will illegally reallocate $1.22 billion in federal taxpayer dollars to pay RWE to abandon its affiliates’ offshore wind energy leases in federal waters off the coasts of California, Louisiana, and New York, and require RWE to invest the same amount in out-of-state fossil-fuel projects that will do nothing to support California’s energy economy. If allowed to proceed, the lease buyout threatens to set back California’s burgeoning offshore wind industry, stranding public investments in ports’ offshore wind capacity, and damaging supporting industries and clean energy jobs. 

“Don’t be fooled, this agreement is just another ploy to kill offshore wind projects and slip millions of dollars into the hands of President Trump’s donors and business partners. Yet again, the Trump Administration is trying to thwart the clean energy industry, but when the President repeats his play, so will we,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “Today, we’re putting the Trump Administration on notice that we intend to sue. Offshore wind investments create jobs, bolster our economy, and deliver reliable clean energy to Californians. Whenever the Trump Administration tries to attack clean energy, my office will be here to fight back.” 

“The Trump administration’s latest attack on California’s clean energy future will not go unanswered. We will vigorously contest these unlawful backroom deals that would redirect public funds from clean offshore wind to polluting fossil fuel projects owned by donors to Donald Trump’s campaign coffers,” said CEC Chair David Hochschild. “Our state has invested over $100 million to support offshore wind, which will strengthen energy independence, create good‑paying jobs, and build the clean energy future Californians demand. We will defend that progress every time it is threatened.”

BACKGROUND

California’s offshore wind strategic plan calls for the state to develop 25 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2045, enough to power roughly 25 million homes and provide about 13% of the state’s electricity supply, to accelerate California’s clean energy transition, create local manufacturing jobs, and drive economic development. Since federal offshore wind energy development planning began off California's coast a decade ago, the state has worked with federal agencies, developers, tribes, labor groups, ports, fishermen, local governments, and communities to prepare for offshore wind development. California has invested more than $100 million to ready California’s ports, transmission systems, and industries to support offshore wind generation.

This latest agreement is part of the Trump Administration’s ongoing attempt to cancel offshore wind projects and replace them with fossil-fuel energy projects, including deals with Golden State Wind LLC and Invenergy. On August 6, 2026, RWE announced a $1.22 billion agreement with DOI to cancel three offshore wind energy leases in federal waters off the coasts of California, Louisiana, and New York. The buyout is styled as an alleged settlement agreement that provides for DOI to cancel the wind lease, pay out the bid, and require RWE to fund liquefied natural gas infrastructure and natural gas projects across the country. Beyond that, it has been reported that a majority of the $1.22 billion in federal taxpayer dollars designated for offshore wind will be used by RWE to purchase a stake in a certain fossil-fuel project run by a major Trump donor and neighbor.

In the Notice of Intent to Sue sent to DOI and RWE today, California alleges that the buyout deal violates the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA), which is intended to give states like California a say in the offshore wind leasing program and prevent corrupt backroom deals. The Notice of Intent to Sue provides a 60-day window to cure the OCSLA violations before California files suit to put a stop to this unlawful buyout. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta, alongside the California Coastal Commission, the California Natural Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (collectively, “California”), submitted a comment letter expressing grave concerns about the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) proposed rule that would broadly waive 13 U.S. environmental laws for a wide range of commercial space licenses and permits. Specifically, the proposed rule would allow the FAA to avoid complying with critical U.S. environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act, and the Clean Water Act, when approving licenses and permits for commercial space launches and operations. In the comment letter, California lays out its deep concerns with this ill-conceived proposed rule that would pave the way for increased, environmentally harmful space launch activity while eviscerating protections from environmental laws, leading to potential harms to public health. The rule would also drastically reduce opportunities for the public to engage with and be informed about space launch projects in California.

“California is the fourth largest economy in the world and home to roughly one-third of the world’s space companies. It is also home to a rich and diverse environment with extensive natural resources that sustain our communities. Responsible innovation and sound stewardship go hand in hand,” said Attorney General Bonta. “This proposed rule ignores the values that are a bedrock of our robust economy. Our letter lays out these concerns and urges the Trump Administration to rescind their rule.”  

California has a strong interest in space launches, as the state hosts these launches primarily at the Vandenburg Space Force Base on the coast north of Santa Barbara. California’s launch capabilities are extensive, with over 2,000 launches to date. A third of U.S. space technology companies call California home — this is a thriving sector of California’s economy, accounting for about $37 billion in the state’s annual gross domestic product and over 110,000 California jobs. California is also home to a rich and diverse environment with extensive natural resources, from the varied islands off the coastline and nine National Parks. It is the most biodiverse and ecologically diverse state in the United States. 

In the comment letter, California lays out the following concerns:  

• The proposed rule is illegal because the FAA does not have authority under the statute to waive compliance with 13 U.S. environmental laws for all commercial licenses to operate launch sites, reentry sites, operation of launch and reentry vehicles, and experimental permits. 
• The open-ended and unlimited scope of the waiver is so overbroad that the FAA has not, and could not, make a legally supportable determination. Commercial space launches are rapidly increasing, while the technology remains new with potential impacts that are not yet fully understood. 
• The FAA proposal violates NEPA because the FAA cannot reasonably conclude that the proposed action need not comply with 13 U.S. environmental laws without first ensuring it has first taken a hard look at the context-specific conditions of its proposed action and at necessary mitigation measures.
• The proposed rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act and is arbitrary and capricious.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined two multistate comment letters opposing the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) proposals that would drastically reduce nuclear radiation protection regulations and reactor safety oversight. The proposed rulemakings are part of the NRC’s coordinated effort to reduce its oversight of nuclear energy projects and thereby remove accountability safeguards. In the comment letters, the coalition argues that the proposed changes violate the Atomic Energy Act (AEA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), among others, and increase risks to public and nuclear energy worker safety and potential environmental impacts.

“Once again, the Trump Administration is more concerned with corporate interests than the health and safety of the American people. When it comes to nuclear energy, public safety should be priority one, two, and three,” said Attorney General Bonta. “These proposed changes allow industry to dodge early NRC review and would defer too many safety decisions to industry to self-regulate. It also would abandon the standard that the NRC has relied on for decades that requires the lowest radiation level achievable. I’m proud to join this coalition in opposing these changes, because we can pursue innovation without sacrificing safety.”

Nuclear energy is an important source of energy in many states, but the fundamental nature of this powerful technology involves environmental and public health risks. On July 15, 2026, NRC published a proposed rule that would allow increased allowable radiation exposure, reduce monitoring and reporting requirements, and revise air and water emission standards to create flexibility for industry and help accelerate deployment of nuclear technology in the U.S. The proposed rule would also eliminate NRC’s use of the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) standard to evaluate radiological protection measures at facilities and replace it with a graded approach that NRC fails to describe with particularity.

A day later, on July 16, 2026, NRC continued its wholesale revision of its long-standing regulations with a proposed rule that would dramatically narrow the ability for states and the public to meaningfully participate in the permitting and licensing processes for nuclear facilities and would change construction and oversight requirements to allow for faster build-out of nuclear facilities. Nuclear technologies can have significant impacts on communities, and the law requires meaningful opportunity for the public to weigh in during the process. The NRC should not reduce the public’s opportunity to participate in what affects their communities. And especially given the push to deploy novel nuclear technologies, more direct NRC oversight with greater transparency is needed; not less.

In the comment letters, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition assert that, among other things, the proposed rulemaking changes would:

• Benefit the nuclear industry at the potential expense of the public, employees, and the environment, in violation of the NRC’s mandate to prioritize public health and safety and the environment.
• Grant too much latitude to licensees to self-regulate by allowing them to make underlying decisions that affect what actions are subject to NRC approval.
• Violate the AEA and NEPA by failing to provide meaningful opportunity for public comment before construction activities begin.  

In sending the comment letters, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont and Washington.

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) led a multistate comment letter opposing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposal to loosen regulations that control the emissions of smog-forming nitrogen oxides (NOx) from semi-trucks and other heavy-duty vehicles. If finalized, EPA’s proposed rule would harm public health and welfare by contributing to air pollution that causes harmful health effects and generally contributes to poor air quality, particularly in environmental justice communities. In the comment letter, the coalition argues that EPA should withdraw its proposal, as it fails to comply with the statutory requirements of the Clean Air Act. 

“The EPA’s harmful rule is not only illegal, but it would put public health at risk by contributing to dangerous air pollution with serious health impacts. These impacts are especially concerning for communities of color and low-income communities, which too often bear a disproportionate share of pollution and its health consequences,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Trump Administration should be strengthening protections against vehicle pollution, not weakening them. That’s why we are urging them to withdraw this illegal rule immediately.” 

The transportation sector is the largest source of NOx emissions in the United States, with heavy-duty vehicles being the second-largest contributor within that sector. Exposure to pollutants like NOx is associated with a range of adverse respiratory effects, including asthma, respiratory inflammation, and decreased lung function and growth. Communities of color and low-income communities, who disproportionately live, work, or attend school near major roadways and other NOx pollution sources like railyards, ports, and warehouses, are most vulnerable to this pollution and the resulting health impacts. 

In July 2026, EPA published its proposed rule, which, if finalized, would revise a number of emission regulations for heavy-duty vehicles published in 2023 under President Biden. EPA’s proposed rule specifically attempts to roll back key regulations that greatly reduce the emission of NOx from commercial vehicles. For example, the proposed rule would: 

• Shorten the emission warranty period for heavy-duty vehicles from 10 years to 5 years for model year (MY) 2027 and later vehicles, which by the agency’s own calculations would result in an additional 36,000 tons of NOx emissions annually. 
• Delay the implementation of the 2023 Rule’s longer regulatory useful life periods from MY 2027 to MY 2030. This change would result in increased NOx emissions by shortening the period over which emission standards apply to heavy-duty vehicles.
• Weaken key regulatory inducements that ensure that emission control systems are properly maintained and functioning. 

In the comment letter, the coalition explains that the proposed rule, if finalized, would violate the law by undermining separately-required emissions standards for heavy-duty vehicles, impairing states' and cities’ efforts to meet federally-mandated air quality standards, and by failing to consider the health consequences of increased pollution from the rule. The coalition urges EPA to withdraw the proposed rule immediately.

In submitting the comment letter, Attorney General Bonta and CARB lead the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and the Chief Legal Officers of the City of Chicago, Illinois; the City and County of Denver, Colorado; the City of New York, New York; and the City and County of San Francisco, California. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined a multistate comment letter in opposition to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) draft risk evaluation for Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). TBBPA is a flame-retardant widely used in consumer products, mainly plastic enclosures for electronics, and also in furniture and textile items and building and construction materials. Exposure to TBBPA may result in detrimental health impacts, including diseases associated with its neuro-, immuno-, and reproductive toxicities and cancer, and infants and children are particularly vulnerable to TBBPA exposure. In the letter, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition argue that EPA’s deficient draft risk evaluation ignores the health risks of TBBPA exposure in consumer products, and, if adopted, would undermine existing protections several states have adopted to restrict the use of TBBPA to protect their residents against its harmful health effects.

“The Trump Administration’s draft risk evaluation would endanger consumers by resulting in weaker regulations that expose them to preventable health risks,” said Attorney General Bonta. “California will not stand for decisions that put the health and well-being of our residents and Americans nationwide at risk. We strongly urge the EPA to withdraw this draft risk evaluation immediately.”

Enacted in 1976, TSCA gives the EPA the authority to regulate chemical substances to protect human health and the environment and to require manufacturers and importers to provide information on chemical substances. TSCA allows the EPA to evaluate existing and new chemicals for safety and requires the EPA to restrict or ban chemicals that pose unreasonable risks of injury to human health or the environment. In 2019, the EPA designated TBBPA as “High-Priority Substance” for risk evaluation under TSCA. The EPA identified significant concerns that TBBPA may pose detrimental health risks through chronic exposures.

California has long recognized the need for strong protections against TBBPA exposure. In 2018, California passed Assembly Bill 2998, which restricted the sale and distribution of juvenile products, upholstered furniture, replacement components of reupholstered furniture, and the foam in mattresses, that contain certain flame-retardant chemicals, including TBBPA. The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment has also listed TBBPA on California’s Proposition 65 list of carcinogens because it is a probable human carcinogen. 

The coalition asserts that the EPA’s draft risk evaluation fails to:

• Include all the intended, known, or foreseeable uses of TBBPA in the conditions of use evaluated and makes separate risk determinations for workers, consumers, and the general population.
• Consider aggregate exposures and risks and evaluate TBBPA within a class of other flame retardants by using the best available science, as required by TSCA.
• Account for existing state regulations which may be impacted by EPA’s final risk evaluation for TBBPA. 

In filing the comment letter, Attorney General Bonta is joined by the attorneys general of Delaware, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Wisconsin, the District of Columbia, and the Corporation Counsel of the City of New York.

LOS ANGELES — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced the creation of the first-of-its-kind Affordability Response Team within the California Department of Justice (DOJ). The Affordability Response Team will draw on the knowledge of experts from sections across the department, working together to find, investigate, and go after individuals and corporations deploying unlawful practices that are making life unaffordable for the people of California.

“Californians, we hear you: The cost of living is much too high. For many people in our state the cost of a week off work, a set of new tires, or a trip to the grocery store — let alone a mortgage or a visit to the emergency room — are not within reach,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Today, I am proud to announce the launch of my office’s Affordability Response Team. Comprised of legal experts from across DOJ, the Affordability Response Team will work to investigate and go after practices that are unlawfully raising costs. It will create a pipeline to tackle affordability from all angles — whether it be unlawful behavior by corporations, landlords, scammers, or policies that are driving up prices. Hardworking Californians deserve fair prices, deserve the ability to make enough to meet their basic needs — and also deserve to have the experiences, vacations, and joys that make life richer.”

Californians are facing an affordability crisis of epic proportion — and many cannot see a light at the end of the tunnel. Housing shortages, skyrocketing grocery prices, rising healthcare and childcare costs, predatory corporate behavior, and the federal government’s unstable economic policies are all making it difficult not only to cover the basics, but to enjoy many of the things hardworking Americans should be able to afford — like a family vacation or a dinner out. The affordability crisis disproportionately impacts low-income households, communities of color, individuals with disabilities, and young adults. In fact, 23% of California’s young adults ages 18–24 live in poverty. And seven in 10 Californians feel that healthcare expenses place a financial strain on their household.

Because these challenges are entrenched and complex, tackling the affordability crisis requires creative thinking and a willingness to attack the problem from all angles. As the top law enforcement officer of California, Attorney General Bonta has been engaged in work that goes after illegal conduct contributing to rising costs. The creation of the Affordability Response Team will amplify DOJ’s ongoing focus on affordability, to allow this work to continue, create a pipeline for continued enforcement, and signal to bad actors that California is zeroed in on this.

THE AFFORDABILITY CRISIS 

Americans across the country are feeling squeezed by a wall of rising costs.

Already high food prices are predicted to increase by 3.4% over the next year and a growing number of people are skipping meals or relying on food banks because of rising food costs. Utility prices and gas prices have also increased, at the same time, wages have stagnated or declined for many workers. Since 1970’s, wages for the bottom 90% of earners have increased 44%, while wages for the top 1% of earners have risen more than 180%. More Americans are taking on debt because of the rising cost of necessities. Credit card debt in the U.S. by the end of 2025 hit a record of $1.28 trillion — and in the first quarter of this year, the percentage of credit-card balances that were at least 90 days delinquent rose to 13.12%, the highest level in 15 years.

Not all Americans are feeling the squeeze. As most households are trying to figure out how the numbers are supposed to add up for life in America, demand for luxury yachts and private jets is surging. The top 1% of Americans held 32% of America’s wealth and CEO compensation increased by almost 6% to $17.7 million as company boards rewarded their top executives for bigger profits. President Trump has said he doesn’t think about Americans financial situation and his Administration is walking the talk by exacerbating the affordability crisis with its polices. Policies like rolling back antitrust enforcement that holds large corporations accountable, pursuing international policy that leaves consumers feeling pain at the pump, prioritizing tax cuts for wealthier Americans, levying an illegal regime of tariffs, and destroying the agency responsible for protecting Americans from exploitation by big businesses who aren’t playing by the rules. All the while, the President and his own family are profiting wildly from holding public office.

FOCUS AREAS 

The Affordability Response Team will deploy DOJ's tools in these areas:

Keeping the Household Running: Grocery, Gas, and Utility Costs

From cable bills to grocery runs, the household bills Californians grapple with every month seem to be endlessly going up.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Secures End of Unlawful Meat Price Coordination, Announces Settlement with Agri Stats
• April 2026: Naming Names: Attorney General Bonta Secures Public Access to Evidence in Amazon Price Fixing Case

A Roof Over Your Head: Housing & Insurance Costs

Confronting California’s housing shortage, unlawful landlord behavior, and rising home insurance costs.

Affordability in Action:

• February 2026: Attorney General Bonta Announces Settlement with Redding Property Management Company for Violating Tenant Protection Act
• November 2025: Attorney General Bonta Announces $7 Million Settlement with Greystar for Participating in an Algorithmic Rent Alignment Scheme

Relief from Sickening Healthcare Costs

Tackling consolidation in the healthcare industry and the rising costs associated with going to the doctor and paying for prescriptions, so that all Californians can afford the care they need to be well.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Conditionally Approves Proposed Transaction to Ensure Continued Access to Senior Care Services in Fresno County
• March 2026: Attorney General Bonta Opposes Trump Administration’s Proposed Expansion of Catastrophic Health Insurance Plans 

Investing in Our Future: Childcare, Education, & Retirement

Ensuring Californians can care for their families, pursue a livelihood, invest in their future, and plan for every stage of their lives.

Affordability in Action:

• May 2026: Attorney General Bonta Opposes Plan to Weaken Federal Protections for Retirement Investments
• February 2026: Attorney General Bonta Defeats Trump Administration in Court Again, Continues Protecting Over $10 Billion in Child Care and Family Assistance Funding

All Work and Harder to Play: The High Cost of Enjoying Life

From planning a vacation to seeing your favorite band in concert, the joys of life are getting harder and harder to afford. The Affordability Response Team is tackling hidden fees and going after corporate practices hiking up prices for entertainment, tech, and trips.

Affordability in Action:

• April 2026: Attorney General Bonta Celebrates Historic Verdict in Live Nation/Ticketmaster Trial
• July 2024: Attorney General Bonta to Consumers: This Summer, Enjoy California — Without the Hidden Fees

Financial Protection: Protecting Your Hard-Earned Money

Protecting Californians by going after shady practices by big banks, lenders, and policies that unfairly penalize consumers and leave them worse off.

Affordability in Action:

• January 2026: Attorney General Bonta Helps Secure $425 Million Capital One Settlement
• January 2026: We're Going to Need a Bigger Boat: Attorney General Bonta Continues Championing Legislation to Protect California Veterans Against Claim Sharks, Financial Exploitation

Earning Less: Labor, Wages, and the Cost of Doing Business

Championing workers’ rights and maintaining a vibrant, profitable economy go hand in hand.

 Affordability in Action:

• March 2026: Attorney General Bonta Urges Congress to Fix Trump’s Tariff Mess, Refund Americans
• July 2025: Attorney General Bonta Announces Nearly $2 Million Settlement with Janitorial Franchising Companies Barring Use of Franchising to Misclassify Workers

Scams, Scams, Scams!

From social media investment scams to job scams and robocalls, cracking down and sounding the alarm on conduct preying on consumers’ pocketbooks.

Affordability in Action:

• April 2026: All That Glitters isn’t Gold: Attorney General Bonta Warns Californians of LA 2028 Olympic Games Ticket Scams
• August 2025: The Robocall Task Force Strikes Again! Attorney General Bonta Launches Operation Robocall Roundup

Click here to learn more about DOJ’s Recent Affordability Work.

RESOURCES — You Tell Us, What Corporations or Practices Should We Know About?

Housing: The Housing Justice Team reminds Californians that they can send complaints or tips related to housing to oag.ca.gov/report. Tenants who need legal help can find legal aid resources in their area at www.LawHelpCA.org.

Antitrust: Antitrust laws and their enforcement help protect consumers by ensuring businesses compete fairly, which often results in lower prices, higher quality goods, and more innovative products. Use DOJ’s Antitrust Complaint Form to report anticompetitive conduct — like price fixing, collusion, or monopolization concerns — that potentially violate the antitrust laws.

Consumer/Business/Healthcare: If you have a complaint about a business who is not complying with consumer protection or other laws, consumers can visit DOJ’s reporting page to submit a complaint.

OAKLAND – California Attorney General Rob Bonta today announced that California is leading a multistate coalition in filing an amicus brief that supports affirmance of a district court order that granted the New York Attorney General’s motion to quash grand jury subpoenas issued by an Acting U.S. Attorney whose appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. The district court found that the Acting U.S. Attorney lacked authority to issue the subpoenas and disqualified him from any further involvement in prosecuting or supervising any investigations related to the subject of the subpoenas. The subpoenas sought to probe New York’s investigations into the Trump Organization and the National Rifle Association (NRA). The brief is being filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

“Respect for the Constitution is not optional,” said Attorney General Bonta. “The Appointments Clause exists to ensure accountability, transparency, and balance in our federal government. When that process is bypassed, it threatens not only the rule of law but also the ability of states to protect their residents from federal overreach.”

The coalition’s brief argues that adherence to the Appointments Clause is essential to preserving the separation of powers and protecting state sovereignty. It emphasizes that allowing improperly appointed officials to wield expansive grand jury authority risks undermining the integrity and reliability of the justice system.

Grounded in the history and purpose of Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution, the Appointments Clause was designed as a check on executive authority by requiring Senate advice and consent. As the brief explains, this process promotes the selection of qualified officials serving the national interest while ensuring that states, through their senators, have a voice in federal appointments— including for U.S. Attorneys whose decisions directly affect state residents. 

The brief also addresses the narrow statutory exception allowing temporary appointments as stopgaps while the Appointments Clause’s advice and consent process is completed, noting that such authority is strictly time-limited. This exception was misused in this instance because the Acting U.S. Attorney continued serving after the expiration of a prior temporary appointment, bypassing the constitutional confirmation process. 

In filing the brief, Attorney General Bonta was joined by the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington and the District of Columbia.

Here is a copy of the brief. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta joined a coalition of 17 attorneys general in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia opposing an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) notice (Notice 2025-42) that limits the eligibility of wind and solar projects to receive certain IRS tax credits. Wind and solar projects usually qualify for certain tax credits once they have begun construction, but this notice arbitrarily narrows the threshold for what is considered the beginning of construction for the purposes of claiming the tax credit. In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition assert that this proposed tax policy will stymie projects, exacerbate the negative effects of climate change, and decrease the supply of clean energy while increasing costs to ratepayers precisely at a time when our nation needs more clean energy, not less. 

“At a time when the demand for energy is increasing, we should be ramping up clean energy projects, not slowing them down. The Trump Administration's policy represents a step backward that will decrease the supply of clean energy — and clean energy jobs — and increase costs for consumers,” said Attorney General Bonta. “It’s bad tax policy, and it’s illegal, plain and simple. I urge the court to vacate this unlawful action, which harms communities and ratepayers across the country.”  

Current projections demonstrate that the nationwide demand for electricity is increasing with the advent of new data centers, cloud-based services, artificial intelligence, and more. To meet this demand and incentivize the development of clean energy, the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act created the Clean Electricity Production Tax Credit and the Clean Electricity Investment Tax Credit. These tax credits — designed to be accessible to any type of clean electricity facility with zero greenhouse gas emissions — were projected to save consumers $16 to $34 billion in annual electric costs by 2035. The tax credits were also projected to reduce air pollutants by 20% and deliver 300 to 400 million tons in greenhouse gas reductions compared to no tax credits by 2035.  

However, in July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act was signed into law and phased out the tax credits for wind and solar facilities that would be placed into service after December 31, 2027, with an exception for facilities that begin construction on or before July 4, 2026. In August 2025, the IRS issued Notice 2025-42, which restricted the criteria for determining when certain wind and solar facilities began construction for the purposes of claiming the tax credit. Under the new policy, the previous safe harbor that required certain developers to incur 5% of the total project cost by July 4, 2026, is no longer sufficient to qualify for the tax credit. As a result, many wind and solar projects may be abandoned, along with the jobs they would have created, or cost substantially more to build — costs that would be passed on to ratepayers once the project is up and running. In December 2026, a coalition of non-governmental organizations, industry participants, and public entities responded by filing a complaint against the IRS alleging that the notice violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition assert that Notice 2025-42: 

• Decreases the supply of clean energy available in the long term and increases electricity costs. 
• Results in a variety of harms, including damage to prior economic investments in renewable energy development, the ability to plan for and obtain reliable affordable energy, and the ability to protect land and residents from severe environmental and public health harms caused by pollution from fossil fuel energy sources.
• Is arbitrary and capricious without reasonable justification that explains why the IRS wants to discourage wind and solar development.  

Attorney General Bonta is committed to fighting federal actions that attack reliable, affordable, and sustainable power. Just last week, he filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration for illegally rolling back funding for clean energy and infrastructure programs, including the $1.2 billion ARCHES clean hydrogen. He also filed an amicus brief opposing separate federal efforts to obstruct wind and solar energy development. Late last year, he claimed victory after a court order invalidated the Trump Administration’s effort to halt wind energy development following prior litigation on the matter. 

In filing the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta joins the attorneys general of Oregon, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today co-led a multistate coalition of 12 attorneys general and the California Public Utilities Commission in filing an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit supporting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in defending Order No. 1920. The order — titled Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation — requires electric transmission providers to engage in long-term planning for regional transmission facilities and consider evolving demands and sources when proposing how to pay for those facilities. In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition explain that Order 1920’s sensible long-term planning requirements will help support the development of needed transmission infrastructure, improve the grid’s reliability, incorporate state engagement, and reduce future costs to consumers.

“Advancing affordable, reliable, and clean energy should be about reducing costs to consumers and controlling the temperature on our planet’s thermometer. Long-term planning for the nation’s grid is commonsense and not a partisan issue,” said Attorney General Bonta. “Order 1920 advances an efficient approach to long-term energy transmission planning. With today’s amicus brief, we welcome FERC’s effort and urge the Court to uphold Order 1920 which will support efficient and clean energy infrastructure for our future.” 

"California’s clean energy future depends on a modern, well-planned transmission system that can reliably deliver affordable electricity to where it is needed,” said Alice Reynolds, President of the California Public Utilities Commission. “FERC’s Order 1920 is consistent with California’s long-term regional transmission planning process and will support the development of a lower cost, more resilient grid across the Western region.”

Electricity transmission is like an interstate highway system that connects generation sources to customers; it must have sufficient capacity along the corridors where it is needed. FERC properly identified deficiencies with the past model of transmission planning, including concerns about grid reliability, affordability, and growing electricity needs, and carefully responded with Order 1920. Order 1920’s transmission-planning reforms will generate several significant affordability and reliability benefits for the entire Western grid, including California consumers. It requires transmission providers to undertake long-term regional planning and then regularly update those plans. It also requires that providers incorporate economic and reliability benefits when choosing new transmission infrastructure projects, consider electrical grid-enhancing technologies, and improve state and interregional cooperation. These requirements will help California’s policies to connect less expensive and cleaner power sources to the grid — like wind and solar — thereby reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the power sector, which is the nation’s second largest source of GHG emissions. At the same time, Order 1920 will improve reliability and lower costs when compared to the current approach to transmission planning.  

On May 13, 2024, FERC approved Order 1920, which it subsequently amended twice in response to administrative petitions. A few Republican-led States, conservative interest groups, and other entities have filed court challenges to Order 1920. These cases have been consolidated in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals under the lead case, Appalachian Voices v. FERC. 

In the amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and the coalition explain that Order 1920:  

• Is expected to accelerate upgrades with new, less expensive renewable projects and provide a critical foundation for realizing the GHG emission reduction benefits from various state and local climate and energy initiatives adopted by the coalition. 
• Will spur the replacement of aging facilities and infrastructure that otherwise would have been avoided or deferred. This will improve affordability and reliability of the power sector, which too often relies on narrow decision-making that develops local power lines in an inefficient fashion. 
• Includes several mechanisms specifically designed to reduce consumer costs. It requires providers to incorporate economic benefits into the planning for new facilities, and it also provides a mechanism for the reevaluation of approved transmission projects to prevent or minimize cost overruns.
• Respects the important role played by states in developing and siting new power sources.

In filing today’s amicus brief, Attorney General Bonta and Attorney General of Massachusetts Andrea Joy Campbell, lead a coalition that includes the attorneys general of Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and the District of Columbia. 

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today celebrated the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington’s final ruling against the Trump Administration in multistate litigation challenging the illegal withholding of funding for electric vehicle charging infrastructure. As of today, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has approved nearly all funding allocated to California under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program. After securing an early court order in June blocking the Trump Administration’s unlawful withholding of funding and with today’s court order, Attorney General Bonta, along with California Governor Gavin Newsom, the California Department of Transportation, and the California Energy Commission, has now ensured that California can access $379 million in funding to support electric vehicle charging infrastructure it had been previously awarded. 

“After several attempts by the Trump Administration to unlawfully block funding for electric vehicle infrastructure, we have secured a full victory in court, guaranteeing $379 million in funding that will help ensure Californians can access clean, affordable transportation,” said Attorney General Rob Bonta. “This funding supports our continued commitment to fight air pollution and climate change and empower Californians to innovate and create clean jobs. We will continue to oppose Trump’s unlawful attempts to block Congressionally-appropriated funding and to protect innovation and our environment.”

"President Trump tried to kill billions in funding for our national EV charging infrastructure, and he lost," said Governor Gavin Newsom. "California sued, California won, and now states across the country can create good-paying jobs, cut pollution, and build the charging network we need to beat China in the global race for clean vehicles. Californians want EVs, and we're committed to building the infrastructure to make that happen. The fourth-largest economy in the world isn't backing down — California is open for business."

"This decision will help us fulfill our mission to build a cleaner and more reliable transportation system for all travelers," said California Transportation Secretary Toks Omishakin. "It's in alignment with Governor Newsom's steadfast commitment to combat the climate change crisis and stand up for every Californian."

"Electric vehicles are here to stay — here in California, across the nation, and around the world — and the NEVI program is an important part of the strategy to meet our growing demand for charging infrastructure," said California Energy Commission Chair David Hochschild. "We applaud the Western District's ruling and look forward to continue building out a robust, reliable, accessible EV charging network for all Californians."

BACKGROUND

In 2021, Congress passed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. One provision of the IIJA appropriated $5 billion for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) formula program to facilitate a national network of electric vehicle charging infrastructure across the states, making clean cars accessible and convenient for more consumers and markets. On Day One of his administration, President Trump issued an executive order directing federal agencies to immediately stop releasing certain funds appropriated through the IIJA, including $5 billion that Congress appropriated for electric vehicle charging stations under NEVI. Following that directive, FHWA effectively halted the NEVI program by, among other things, illegally withholding billions in funds that Congress had directed to the states for building EV infrastructure.