By Abbas Nazil
A federal judge in the United States has ordered the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to continue administering billions of dollars in Environmental and Climate Justice Grants that the agency cancelled, ruling that the decision to terminate the programme was unlawful and directing the agency to comply with its legal obligations.
U.S. District Judge Richard Mark Gergel issued the order after finding that the EPA had improperly halted the Biden-era grant programme, which was established under the Inflation Reduction Act to support environmental and climate projects in disadvantaged communities.
The judge said the agency was “defying” an earlier court order that had declared the cuts to the programme unlawful and required the EPA to restore its administration of the grants.
The ruling followed a legal challenge brought by a coalition of cities and nonprofit organisations after the EPA terminated funding for their environmental initiatives early last year.
The groups argued that the court’s previous decision required the agency to reinstate the cancelled grants, while the EPA maintained that the ruling did not require further action or restoration of the funds.
Rejecting the agency’s position, Judge Gergel clarified that the EPA must continue implementing the Environmental and Climate Justice Programme until September 30, 2026, the date through which Congress had authorised funding for the initiative.
He stated that the agency must fulfil its statutory responsibility to manage the programme and ensure that approved climate and environmental projects receive the support provided by Congress.
The $2.8 billion grant programme was designed to support communities facing disproportionate environmental challenges by funding projects focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, improving air quality, addressing pollution and developing climate-resilient infrastructure.
The grants targeted underserved communities across the United States, particularly areas affected by environmental hazards and the impacts of climate change.
The EPA had cancelled the funding following internal directives linked to the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)-driven cost-cutting efforts, prompting criticism from environmental groups and local governments that depended on the grants for climate and pollution reduction initiatives.
In his ruling, Judge Gergel described the agency’s decision to terminate the programme as “arbitrary and capricious,” stating that the EPA lacked sufficient legal justification for ending the funding.
The court decision represents a major victory for environmental organisations, municipalities and community groups that had challenged the cancellation of the grants.
An EPA spokesperson said the agency was reviewing the court’s decision but did not immediately indicate whether it would appeal the ruling or begin restoring the cancelled funds.
The ruling highlights ongoing legal disputes over federal climate programmes in the United States and reinforces the role of courts in determining whether government agencies can discontinue congressionally approved environmental initiatives without following legal requirements.
