Trump’s offshore wind policy shift may upend US Wind’s Maryland project, as the administration moves to revoke federal approval of its 2.2 GW Construction and Operations Plan (COP).
The U.S. Department of the Interior confirmed in an August 25 court filing that the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) is reconsidering its approval, potentially halting development and reshaping the mid-Atlantic clean energy outlook.
In the U.S. District Court for Maryland, federal defendants and the plaintiffs — led by the Mayor and City Council of Ocean City — jointly requested a briefing schedule to address Interior’s forthcoming motion for voluntary remand. BOEM intends to file the motion by September 12, 2025, asking the court to return the project approval for agency reconsideration, and may also seek to vacate the COP entirely.
“BOEM is in the process of reconsidering its prior approval of the Maryland Offshore Wind Project Construction and Operations Plan,” Department of Justice attorneys wrote in the filing.
While the plaintiffs agreed to the proposed schedule, US Wind, the project developer, opposed it. The company argued that any vacatur would require full merits review and summary judgment based on the administrative record, not a remand motion.
The Maryland case is part of a wider campaign by the Trump Administration to reverse U.S. offshore wind expansion. In January 2025, Trump issued a moratorium on new federal offshore wind leases, followed by stop-work orders on projects such as Revolution Wind off Rhode Island and Empire Wind off New York. Industry analysts say these moves have chilled investment, contributing to a reported 36% drop in U.S. renewable energy investment this year, even as global spending has surged.
The administration has framed its actions as necessary for national security and cost control. But governors, developers, and investors argue the policy shift undermines regional clean energy targets, corporate power purchase agreements, and long-planned supply chain investments.
The Maryland Offshore Wind Project was approved in December 2024 and planned to deliver up to 2.2 GW of clean power — enough to supply 718,000 homes. Development and construction were projected to support about 2,680 jobs annually over seven years. The project also underpins US Wind’s Sparrows Point Steel facility in Baltimore, envisioned as a national hub for monopile manufacturing and offshore logistics.
If the COP approval is vacated, the timeline for construction could be reset, delaying power delivery and jeopardizing Maryland’s ability to meet its offshore wind targets. Local economic benefits — from union construction jobs to manufacturing contracts at Sparrows Point — would also be at risk.
US Wind has maintained that its permits are legally sound. “We remain confident that the federal permits we secured… are legally sound,” said Nancy Sopko, the company’s senior director of external affairs, in recent press coverage. Opponents, including Ocean City officials, argue the project would harm tourism and local ecosystems.
Meanwhile, developers and investors are increasingly vocal about the policy whiplash. Analysts warn that sudden reversals undermine financing for large-scale projects that depend on regulatory certainty and long-term supply agreements.
For corporate buyers and utilities in the mid-Atlantic, the Maryland project represents one of the region’s largest anticipated renewable supply streams. A prolonged legal or regulatory reset could stall power purchase agreements and affect grid reliability planning.
From a jobs perspective, Sparrows Point Steel is positioned as a rare U.S. heavy manufacturing facility dedicated to offshore wind components. A setback in Maryland could reverberate through the domestic supply chain, weakening efforts to localize clean energy manufacturing.
Nationally, the Trump Administration’s reversals place the U.S. out of step with global offshore wind momentum. European and Asian markets continue scaling capacity and attracting private investment, while U.S. projects face heightened uncertainty.
The court could:
Each scenario carries implications for project timing, local economic benefits, and broader clean energy policy.
