Billions of dollars for solar energy projects nationwide remain in limbo more than a month after two federal judges ruled in separate cases that the Environmental Protection Agency illegally canceled the “Solar for All” program.
Massachusetts won $156 million under the competitive Biden-era initiative intended to expand access to solar energy in low-income communities. The EPA shuttered the program in August 2025 and rescinded all grants. Despite the recent court rulings, the fate of that money remains uncertain.
The EPA has until mid-November to appeal the court rulings. A spokesperson for the agency said in an email that “EPA is reviewing the decision and considering options for appeal.”
“This is a program that has the potential to lower people’s energy bills, get inexpensive clean electricity on the grid, and help the communities that the Solar For All program was designed to help,” said James Crowley, a senior attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation, which is representing plaintiffs in one of the court cases.
“We hope that EPA is considering all that — along with Congress’s intent — and they might choose not to appeal,” Crowley said.
Congress funded the $7 billion Solar For All program through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. Two years later, Massachusetts won $156 million. The Healey administration said the program could reduce energy costs by 20% for 31,000 low-income and disadvantaged homes, support 2,800 clean energy jobs and dramatically decrease greenhouse gas emissions.
Soon after President Trump’s second term began, his administration froze the Solar for All funds. In July 2025, Congress passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” a massive tax and spending law that terminated the program. The bill stipulated that grants already obligated under Solar for All were not affected, but EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin argued that the bill repealed EPA’s authority to administer the program and rescinded the funds.
The EPA then officially canceled the program, calling it a “boondoggle.”
In a statement, Zeldin said the EPA would be “an exceptional steward of taxpayer dollars,” not “a frivolous spender in the name of ‘climate equity.’ ”
A variety of groups that won Solar for All grants sued the EPA, including nonprofits, solar companies and states.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell, a plaintiff in one of the lawsuits, said in a statement that “the Trump Administration’s attempt to illegally gut this program will eliminate good-paying jobs, neglect the dangers of climate change, and raise costs for low-income residents.”
In September, a federal judge in Rhode Island ruled the Trump EPA exceeded its authority when it shut down the program. A few days later, a federal judge in the Washington D.C. ruled in a separate case that the EPA’s termination of the initiative was illegal, arbitrary and capricious.
The EPA has 60 days to appeal the ruling. For now, the Massachusetts Solar for All program remains “on pause,” according to a state spokesperson, as “Massachusetts continues to monitor the status” of the funding.
It’s unclear if the Democrats’ gains in Congress in the midterm elections will affect the EPA’s decision on whether to appeal, or the status of the canceled grants.
Phil Thompson, a professor of urban planning and politics at MIT, said it was possible the incoming Congress could pass legislation to release the funds. With both legislation and the court rulings, he said, “chances are pretty good that the money could be released.”
Even so, he said the delays represent a missed opportunity to address both climate change and rising energy costs.
“People’s utility bills have been going up and up,” he said. “Had we built more alternative sources of energy — whether it’s solar or geothermal or other — it would have stabilized those prices.”
Gretchen Goldman, president and CEO of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the incoming congressional Democrats will offer climate advocates an opportunity “to make sure that the funds that Congress has obligated get out the door and are used.”
“We’ve seen that be a challenge in the last two years,” she said.
Rep. Katherine Clark, a Massachusetts Democrat, told WBUR after the election that one of her party’s priorities will be to “restore the cuts” made under the One Big Beautiful Bill.
Clark, who is positioned to become House majority leader when the Democrats take control of Congress in January, did not address Solar for All directly, but said bringing down basic living costs would be a priority.
“We’re going to do quick things, small things, and also start to work on big transformative policies,” she said, “but all focused on making sure that we are fighting for those families who feel like they are drowning in this cost of living crisis.”
This article was originally published on WBUR.org.
Copyright 2026 WBUR