Minnesota v. Wright
AGs of Minnesota and Illinois challenge the Trump Administration's unlawful order that would halt the retirements of costly coal units at the J.H. Campbell power plant in West Olive, MI despite the power plant needing significant and expensive maintenance to do so.
- Categories
- Litigation Status Case Pending: No decision yet on harmful policy
On July 25, 2025, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison and Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul filed a petition for review challenging the U.S. Department of Energy ‘s (DOE) arbitrary and illegal order forcing the continued operation of Consumers Energy’s J.H. Campbell coal-fired power plant in West Olive, MI, under the pretense of a fabricated energy emergency.
The retirement of the Campbell Plant, originally built in the 1960s, has been subject to extensive planning and analysis by state regulators and the broader inter-state power grid. This has included procuring replacement power resources and planning for future resources, compensate for the removal of the Campbell Plant. Consumer Energy planned to retire the plant on May 31, 2025, in accordance with state and regional resource determinations. Despite these plans, DOE Secretary Chris Wright issued an order in May 2025 that claimed that the Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) faces a capacity shortfall and that Campbell’s closure would further decrease available capacity. The order requires the J.H. Campbell plant to run around the clock — regardless of conditions on the electric grid.
Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act gives the DOE secretary authority to take temporary control of the nation’s electricity system during emergency situations. Until now, that authority has predominantly been invoked during wartime or natural disasters. Attorneys General Ellison and Raoul argue that DOE was erroneous in concluding that an emergency existed for MISO—and that even if an emergency did exist, the order to close the plant was not rationally related to the purported emergency.
The plaintiffs challenge would have the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals set aside the unlawful order.