On Monday local time in the United States, a coalition comprising labor unions, non-profit organizations, solar companies, and homeowners formally filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), challenging the legality of its termination of the “Solar for All” program.
It is reported that the “Solar for All” program originated from the Inflation Reduction Act passed by Congress in 2022. The Act specifically allocated $7 billion from the $27 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) for the EPA to distribute through competitive grants to promote zero-emission technologies like rooftop solar in low-income communities. In April 2024, the EPA announced that the program would benefit over 900,000 low-income households, helping them reduce electricity costs and carbon emissions.
However, this process came to an abrupt halt in July 2025. With the passage of the “GREAT Act,” the GGRF and the “Solar for All” program were officially canceled. In August of the same year, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the withdrawal of the program’s funds, stating on social media that the “EPA no longer has the legal authority or appropriation to maintain the program, saving taxpayers $7 billion.”
This decision directly triggered the lawsuit. Plaintiffs, including the Rhode Island AFL-CIO, solar organization Solar United Neighbors, and Sunpath Solar, among others, argue that Zeldin’s action exceeds statutory authority – Congress only permitted the EPA to reallocate uncommitted funds, not to rescind announced grant awards. The plaintiffs also allege that the termination violates both the Inflation Reduction Act and the Administrative Procedure Act, and has already caused significant economic losses to communities and small businesses reliant on the grants. They are seeking declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to restore the program.
The ripple effects of the program’s termination are gradually becoming apparent. According to previously disclosed information, 60 project awardees face risks of funding disruption, which is expected to lead to the loss of over 6,000 jobs and force the suspension of solar installation plans for nearly a million households. The impact is particularly severe for groups already burdened by high energy costs: Data from the US Department of Energy shows that Native American households experience an energy burden 28% higher than the average household, while families in the Southern US bear the highest energy bills in the nation. The program’s cancellation means their electricity costs are likely to rise further.
Notably, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently ruled in a similar case that challenges to the EPA’s cancellation of climate funding must be brought before the US Court of Federal Claims, as such disputes are deemed “contractual in nature” and fall under the Tucker Act.
Currently, the EPA has not publicly responded to the lawsuit. However, public opinion is already concerned about the negative impacts of this policy reversal. The Southern Environmental Law Center has pointed out that this move not only betrays promises made to struggling communities but could also exacerbate public distrust in the federal government. Against the backdrop of continuously rising electricity bills, low-income groups will become the biggest victims.
