Commercial fishing advocates who have been fighting Vineyard Wind 1 for years are asking the nation’s highest court to do what lower courts have not: Rule that federal regulators improperly authorized construction of the 800-MW wind farm off the Massachusetts coast. 

The Responsible Offshore Development Alliance’s petition was docketed by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 10. Statistically, it is a long shot — the justices hear fewer than 100 of the thousands of appeals submitted each year. 

But if the petition is successful, defense of the regulatory decisions (which were made under President Biden, a strong offshore wind supporter) would fall to the Trump administration, which has taken firm steps to limit or block offshore wind development. 

The Texas Public Policy Foundation filed a similar petition to the Supreme Court on March 11 in a similar case that had been consolidated in U.S. District Court with RODA’s challenge. 

The shift from strong support to strong opposition between the two administrations has created a new element of risk and uncertainty for an industry that already was struggling to maintain momentum in the United States.  

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum offered some clarity March 6, when he told Bloomberg that while all offshore wind projects would be reviewed, in accordance with the executive order, advanced projects would be reviewed differently than early stage projects. 

Burgum also echoed Trump’s criticisms that offshore wind is too expensive and cannot serve as a baseload. 

In the challenge it began in January 2022, RODA asserts that the U.S. Interior Department under Biden reinterpreted Section 1337 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to “consider” the impacts of offshore wind projects rather than “ensure” they do not interfere with reasonable uses such as use of the sea or seabed for a fishery. 

Vineyard Wind 1 in 2021 became the first offshore wind proposal green-lighted in federal waters, and RODA said it set the precedent for the 10 other records of decision that followed, all of which were favorable. 

A district court rejected that line of attack (1:22-cv-11172). In December 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied RODA’s request to appeal the District Court’s ruling. 

“Petitioning the SCOTUS is the only option left to ensure American seafood harvesters, and the US wild-caught sustainable seafood industry, are not put out of business at the hands of those who want to turn our oceans into a massive web of industrial power plants,” RODA said March 10 in announcing its petition to the Supreme Court. 

The petition seems to acknowledge that the opportunity to block Vineyard Wind 1 has passed, as roughly three-quarters of its planned turbines are at least partly built. But it seeks to inform future projects: 

“Petitioner asks this court to grant review of this issue of vital importance to the fishing industry and to provide guidance to the secretary [of the Interior] regarding the correct statutory interpretation of ‘shall ensure’ in Section 1337(p)(4) so that future ocean energy projects are reviewed according to the criteria provided by Congress.” 

Texas Public Policy Foundation senior attorney Ted Hadzi-Antich said in a March 11 news release: “This is a stark example of federal administrative agencies shirking their responsibilities to follow the law. When that happens, we are here to hold their feet to the fire.” 

Even without a Supreme Court ruling, the U.S. offshore wind sector is struggling, both from the effects of Trump’s directives and from an array of financial and supply chain problems that set in long before the 2024 presidential election. 

Some recent examples: 

• • Major offshore wind developer RWE, which in November announced a two-year pause in its U.S. efforts, filed notice March 7 that it would lay off 73 employees in Massachusetts. 

• • RWE’s vice president of East Coast offshore development, Amanda Lefton, departed the company to become the acting commissioner of New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation. 

• • SouthCoast Wind’s developers are preparing for a potential delay of up to four years on the project off the Massachusetts coast. 

• • New Jersey canceled its next offshore wind solicitation in February after two bidders pulled out and a third lost one of its project partners. 

• • New Jersey stepped up its review of potential alternative uses for the wind port it has invested more than a half-billion dollars to build but has yet to use for offshore wind construction. 

• • Prysmian canceled its plans to build an offshore wind cable factory in Massachusetts. 

• • Developers booked new impairments on projects planned along the East Coast. 

There are bright spots: 

• • New York state told NetZero Insider recently that work continues on its most recent offshore wind solicitation, which targeted the first quarter of 2025 for finalization of contracts. 

• • Massachusetts did not provide NetZero Insider with an update on its most recent solicitation, but power purchase agreements are due to be finalized by March 31.  

• • Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind is under construction, albeit at a higher cost. 

• • Revolution Wind is under construction off the Massachusetts coast, albeit at a higher cost and with a delayed commercial operation date. 

• • Onshore construction is underway for Empire Offshore Wind in New York, where developer Equinor is building an offshore wind port for over $850 million. On March 11, Empire submitted its request to the state Public Service Commission to proceed with the next phase of its onshore substation construction. 

• • And, of course, construction of Vineyard Wind 1 is far along, though well behind its original schedule after some problems with components.