The Trump administration acknowledged in court documents this month that it canceled more than $7.5 billion in federal clean energy grants awarded during the Biden administration based primarily on political considerations rather than programmatic or performance factors. The grants, which were terminated in October, disproportionately affected projects located in states that voted for Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election and are represented by Democratic senators.

The disclosure emerged amid ongoing litigation by California researchers who challenged the abrupt cancellation of Biden-era funding by multiple federal agencies. The Energy Department’s initial review had recommended canceling over 600 grants across states with different political affiliations, but the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, led by Russell T. Vought, ultimately terminated only 284 grants. Court filings revealed those canceled grants overwhelmingly involved recipient locations in Democratic-leaning states that supported Harris, while hundreds of grants in Republican states that had backed former President Trump remained unaffected despite earlier recommendations for cancellation.

A lawyer for the Energy Department conceded that the administration’s decisions were not driven by statutory, cost-related, or project performance metrics. Instead, the primary factor was political alignment, with an exception noted for a single grant. The cancellations targeted a variety of energy projects aimed at modernizing electrical grids in California and Oregon, reducing methane emissions in Colorado, and developing clean hydrogen fuel hubs in the Pacific Northwest. Some recipients have filed lawsuits seeking to reinstate the funding.

This move forms part of a broader Trump administration strategy to leverage federal grantmaking as a political tool, particularly during contentious budget negotiations earlier this year. Trump publicly threatened to cut funds to what he described as “Democrat agencies,” and Vought announced additional spending reductions targeting Democratic-led states. Critics argue that pending regulatory changes under the administration would grant the president expansive authority to further politicize the disbursement of over $1 trillion in annual federal grants.

Federal officials revealed details of the grant cancellations as part of a legal agreement designed to avoid a lengthy discovery process that might have exposed additional internal deliberations. Similar practices were reported at other agencies, including transportation and health departments, which screened grants using keywords linked to Trump’s political priorities.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright, who testified in June that politics did not influence grant decisions, was contradicted by the recent filings. An Energy Department spokesperson maintained that the initial grant review was free from political influence and that Wright’s testimony distinguished this review from the timing of cancellation announcements. However, the department has previously admitted in other lawsuits that politics played a “primary reason” in terminating grants, with a federal judge ruling some cancellations improper.

The revelations have drawn condemnation from Democratic lawmakers. Senator Patty Murray of Washington and Representative Marcy Kaptur of Ohio, both leading members of appropriations committees, called the politically motivated cuts an “outright un-American” abuse of governmental power, accusing the administration of punishing states and citizens based solely on their political preferences. They condemned the administration for undermining good jobs and hard-working families for partisan reasons. The White House did not respond to requests for comment.