51
New Articles
Find Your Next Job !
2025 was a year of contrasts for U.S. solar: a record-setting year for utility-scale deployment, even as the residential market, trade policy and permitting hurdles posed significant challenges.
Solar deployments continued to grow — even during less-than-ideal conditions — in part due to increased electricity demands. The U.S. solar industry installed 11.7 gigawatts direct current, or GW, of capacity in the third quarter of 2025 — a 20% increase from the third quarter of 2024, and a significant jump in installations.1
Yet this boom unfolded amid intensifying federal policy turbulence, rising trade barriers and investment uncertainty, and all against the backdrop of persistently softening rooftop solar demand.
Utility-scale solar dominated in 2025, with the third quarter alone adding 9.7 GW and pushing annual installations for U.S. solar past 30 GW.2 Growth was concentrated in major renewable states: Texas led the nation, accounting for over 30% of utility-scale solar additions, with California coming in a distant second.3
The West showed strong momentum overall, with Utah entering the top 10, and the Southeast continued its steady rise as states like Florida and Georgia expanded portfolios. Battery storage followed suit, with 5.3 GW deployed in the third quarter — bringing 2025 totals to nearly 11 GW over the first three quarters of the year.4
This surge reflects not only corporate sustainability goals but also a structural shift in electricity demand. Data centers, driven by artificial intelligence and cloud computing, are emerging as major load centers, with forecasts suggesting they could account for nearly half of U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030.
Data centers’ appetite for quickly deployable, reliable power has made solar — and especially solar plus storage — a focus of long-term procurement strategies. This growth is particularly remarkable considering this year’s new slate of federal policies, which introduced complexity for renewable energy projects.
Upon taking office, the new administration issued a presidential memorandum freezing all federal permitting for both onshore and offshore wind projects.5 On Dec. 8, in New York v. Trump, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated the administration’s wind permit freeze, finding it arbitrary, capricious and procedurally unsupported under the Administrative Procedure Act.6
Although the ruling applies only to wind, it may well create a significant precedent, potentially limiting executive authority to impose blanket moratoria on energy project permitting.
The wind case could have direct bearing on the solar industry. In July, the White House issued Executive Order No. 14315, which directed the U.S. Department of the Treasury to terminate subsidies for wind and solar energy.7
Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department of the Interior elevated final decision-making for solar and wind projects to the secretary — an added review step that developers say is already causing delays and injecting new uncertainty.8
Two other executive orders added further complexity for solar development. Executive Order No. 14154, also issued just after the administration took office, declared a “national energy emergency” and directed agencies to remove burdens on domestic energy development, but excluded solar from such efforts — meaning solar projects cannot access the fast-track permitting pathways now available to other energy sources.
By omitting solar from streamlined approvals, the administration has prolonged timelines for utility-scale solar projects on federal lands, where permitting delays are already a major bottleneck. While the order has been challenged in court, in Butterbee Farm v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia last March, it remains in effect.9
Executive Order No. 14260, issued last April, takes a step further by authorizing federal challenges to state climate and clean energy programs, including renewable portfolio standards and renewable energy certificate markets.10 By targeting these state-level frameworks, the order introduces legal uncertainty for developers and investors relying on stable state and regional compliance markets and incentive structures.
Together, these measures increase financial risk, slow project development and undermine the predictability that utility-scale solar needs to scale at pace.
At the same time, trade tensions have escalated sharply. In April, the U.S. Department of Commerce finalized sweeping antidumping and countervailing duties on crystalline silicon cells and modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, citing subsidies originating in China.11
Rates hit over 3,000% for Cambodian exporters, with triple-digit dumping duties for Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam. Those duties are layered on top of Section 201 safeguard tariffs and the reciprocal tariffs announced earlier in the year, raising costs and heightening supply chain anxiety for developers.
Litigation challenging the duties and tariffs followed swiftly. Litigation in the U.S. Court of International Trade and the D.C. district court argued that such tariffs exceeded the authority granted to the executive under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
That statute, the plaintiffs say, does not permit sweeping tariffs that must instead be authorized by Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in V.O.S. Selections Inc. v. U.S. and Learning Resources Inc. v. U.S. in November, and is expected to deliver a decision that could reshape executive trade authority.12
The financial and operational impacts of the administration’s policies have been immediate. Wood Mackenzie Ltd. data indicates that utility-scale solar project costs may increase by double digits, with battery storage projects facing cost increases of over 12%.13
In several cases — such as Sunnova Energy Corp. and Solar Mosaic — residential solar firms entered bankruptcy in mid-2025, citing weakening demand, higher costs and an uncertain policy environment. While those bankruptcies may reflect company-specific factors to some degree, tightened market conditions no doubt served as a trigger.
On top of these trade challenges, the administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act reshaped the incentive frameworks established under the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which the industry had come to rely on.
By imposing new sunset dates and stricter domestic content requirements on existing tax credit structures, the OBBBA reduced the attractiveness of certain projects and introduced added complexity for developers seeking to optimize IRA benefits.
Although intended in part to strengthen U.S. supply chains, these changes have increased compliance burdens and elevated procurement costs and timing risks.
Domestic solar manufacturing was hit as well. Meyer Burger shuttered its Arizona module plant in May, laying off 282 employees after a key offtake agreement fell through.14 The closure underscored the fragility of U.S. solar manufacturing.
Industry leaders emphasize the need for long-term policy stability, which has been undermined on the demand side through executive orders and the administration’s OBBBA legislation, and on the supply side through new foreign entity of concern requirements that affect supply chains.
These headwinds have not, however, fully derailed the industry’s momentum. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projected in February 2025 that the year would see the U.S. add 63 GW of new utility-scale generating capacity, with solar and battery storage together accounting for 81% — including 32.5 GW of solar and 18.2 GW of storage.15
By the end of the third quarter, developers had already installed roughly 30 GW of solar, including over 11 GW of utility-scale solar in the third quarter alone,16 and 4.7 GW of utility-scale storage for almost 11 GW on the year.17
While official data for the fourth quarter has not been released yet, if this momentum continued to the end of 2025, total solar additions could have met or exceeded the 32.5 GW target. And storage installations appear likely to have met expectations, reinforcing the trend toward hybrid projects that deliver reliable, dispatchable clean energy.
Persistent corporate demand has been central to this unlikely growth, with the rapid expansion of data centers emerging as a pillar of sustained demand. In 2025, data centers dominated new corporate clean energy contracts, driven by AI and cloud computing growth.18
Data centers’ need for reliable, quickly deployable power has made solar — especially solar plus storage — a cornerstone of long-term energy strategies. This trend is expected to accelerate as hyperscale facilities seek firm energy supply, reinforcing the case for hybrid projects even as policy volatility encourages caution.
Looking toward 2026, the critical question is whether policy, investment and infrastructure barriers ease enough to support continued scale-up.
On trade, a Supreme Court decision that narrows IEEPA tariff authority or clears the way for refunds could lower supply risks and restore clarity for procurement. Similarly, the possibility of a judicial ruling against the DOI’s new elevated solar and wind review process — though no challenge has been brought to date — could improve permitting outlooks for solar projects on federal land.
A potential case could mirror wind-related suits, using precedent to argue that such added measures exceed lawful executive authority.
Utility-scale solar is no longer a nascent industry — it is a core asset of the U.S. energy system. The fundamental demand drivers, including rising power consumption from data centers and corporate sustainability goals, remain largely intact for now.
Capital should therefore return once investors recalibrate from the policy shocks of 2025. But whether 2026 becomes a year of further growth or gridlock depends on resolving three open fronts: trade, permitting and grid modernization.
The companies that align risk management with these issues — treating policy and infrastructure barriers as solvable design constraints — will lead the next wave of deployment.
If there was one definite signal from 2025, it’s that U.S. solar has ample demand. The central question for 2026 is whether permitting and interconnection can keep pace with that demand — and whether state and federal policies will allow the industry to grow quickly enough to remain competitive amid breakneck data center buildouts.
In this environment, competitiveness is not merely a matter of cost; it is a matter of timing. Developers must deliver solar projects swiftly enough to meet surging electricity needs before alternatives fill the gap.
1 US Solar Market Insight: Q42025 Executive Summary, Wood Mackenzie & Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 3, 2025), https://www.woodmac.com/industry/power-and-renewables/us-solar-market-insight/download-thank-you/?__FormGuid=fa94cd68-ebc0-41ae-8d22-462cbb74f9f7&__FormLanguage=en&__FormSubmissionId=a428d329-0ef1-4391-8c14-ca6507929840.
2 Solar Market Insight Report, Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 9, 2025), https://seia.org/research-resources/us-solar-market-insight/.
3 US Solar Market Insight: Q42025 Executive Summary, Wood Mackenzie & Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 3, 2025) at 18, https://www.woodmac.com/industry/power-and-renewables/us-solar-market-insight/download-thank-you/?__FormGuid=fa94cd68-ebc0-41ae-8d22-462cbb74f9f7&__FormLanguage=en&__FormSubmissionId=a428d329-0ef1-4391-8c14-ca6507929840.
4 https://www.energy-storage.news/us-energy-storage-installations-in-2025-have-already-surpassed-last-years-total-wood-mac/.
5 Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects, The White House (Jan. 20, 2025), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/temporary-withdrawal-of-all-areas-on-the-outer-continental-shelf-from-offshore-wind-leasing-and-review-of-the-federal-governments-leasing-and-permitting-practices-for-wind-projects/.
6 State of New York v. Trump, No. 1:25‑cv‑11221‑PBS (D. Mass. Dec. 8, 2025) (Saris, J.), Mem. & Order.
7 Ending Market Distorting Subsidies for Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources, 90 FR 30821, Federal Register (July 9, 2025), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/07/10/2025-12961/ending-market-distorting-subsidies-for-unreliable-foreign-controlled-energy-sources.
8 Departmental Review Procedures for Decisions, Actions, Consultations, and Other Undertakings Related to Wind and Solar Energy Facilities, U.S. Dept. of the Interior (July 15, 2025).
9 Complaint, Butterbee Farm v. USDA, No. 25CV00737, 202 WL 805998 (D.D.C. March 13, 2025).
10 Protecting American Energy from State Overreach, GovInfo (April 8, 2025), https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/DCPD-202500445.
11 Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From Malaysia and Thailand: Amended Final Countervailing Duty Determinations; Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Countervailing Duty Orders, 90 FR 26791, Federal Register (June 23, 2025), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/06/24/2025-11589/crystalline-silicon-photovoltaic-cells-whether-or-not-assembled-into-modules-from-malaysia-and.
12 See V.O.S. Selections Inc. v. U.S., No. 24-1132 (U.S. argued Nov. 5, 2025); Learning Resources Inc. v. U.S., No. 24-1127 (U.S. argued Nov. 5, 2025).
13 Tariffs to increase costs and slow down development for US power industry, Wood Mackenzie (June 02, 2025), https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/tariffs-to-increase-costs-and-slow-down-development-for-us-power-industry/.
14 Meyer Burger shuts down solar module production and lays off 282 employees in the U.S., Meyer Burger (May 29, 2025), https://www.meyerburger.com/en/newsroom/artikel/meyer-burger-shuts-down-solar-module-production-and-lays-off-282-employees-in-the-us.
15 Solar, battery storage to lead new U.S. generating capacity additions in 2025, U.S. Energy Information Administration (Feb. 24, 2025).
16 https://seia.org/news/third-largest-quarter-on-record/.
17 https://www.energy-storage.news/us-energy-storage-installations-in-2025-have-already-surpassed-last-years-total-wood-mac/.
18 US Tech Companies Contract 48GW of Clean Energy Year on Year Amid AI Boom – Report, Data Center Dynamics (March 3, 2025), https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/us-tech-contracts-48gw-of-clean-energy-year-on-year-amid-ai-boom-report/#:~:text=Energy%20&%20Sustainability%20Channel-,US%20tech%20companies%
20contract%2048GW%20of%20clean%20energy%20year%20on,power%20sources%20for%20their%20operations
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC
Find Your Next Job !
2025 was a year of contrasts for U.S. solar: a record-setting year for utility-scale deployment, even as the residential market, trade policy and permitting hurdles posed significant challenges.
Solar deployments continued to grow — even during less-than-ideal conditions — in part due to increased electricity demands. The U.S. solar industry installed 11.7 gigawatts direct current, or GW, of capacity in the third quarter of 2025 — a 20% increase from the third quarter of 2024, and a significant jump in installations.1
Yet this boom unfolded amid intensifying federal policy turbulence, rising trade barriers and investment uncertainty, and all against the backdrop of persistently softening rooftop solar demand.
Utility-scale solar dominated in 2025, with the third quarter alone adding 9.7 GW and pushing annual installations for U.S. solar past 30 GW.2 Growth was concentrated in major renewable states: Texas led the nation, accounting for over 30% of utility-scale solar additions, with California coming in a distant second.3
The West showed strong momentum overall, with Utah entering the top 10, and the Southeast continued its steady rise as states like Florida and Georgia expanded portfolios. Battery storage followed suit, with 5.3 GW deployed in the third quarter — bringing 2025 totals to nearly 11 GW over the first three quarters of the year.4
This surge reflects not only corporate sustainability goals but also a structural shift in electricity demand. Data centers, driven by artificial intelligence and cloud computing, are emerging as major load centers, with forecasts suggesting they could account for nearly half of U.S. electricity demand growth through 2030.
Data centers’ appetite for quickly deployable, reliable power has made solar — and especially solar plus storage — a focus of long-term procurement strategies. This growth is particularly remarkable considering this year’s new slate of federal policies, which introduced complexity for renewable energy projects.
Upon taking office, the new administration issued a presidential memorandum freezing all federal permitting for both onshore and offshore wind projects.5 On Dec. 8, in New York v. Trump, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts vacated the administration’s wind permit freeze, finding it arbitrary, capricious and procedurally unsupported under the Administrative Procedure Act.6
Although the ruling applies only to wind, it may well create a significant precedent, potentially limiting executive authority to impose blanket moratoria on energy project permitting.
The wind case could have direct bearing on the solar industry. In July, the White House issued Executive Order No. 14315, which directed the U.S. Department of the Treasury to terminate subsidies for wind and solar energy.7
Shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department of the Interior elevated final decision-making for solar and wind projects to the secretary — an added review step that developers say is already causing delays and injecting new uncertainty.8
Two other executive orders added further complexity for solar development. Executive Order No. 14154, also issued just after the administration took office, declared a “national energy emergency” and directed agencies to remove burdens on domestic energy development, but excluded solar from such efforts — meaning solar projects cannot access the fast-track permitting pathways now available to other energy sources.
By omitting solar from streamlined approvals, the administration has prolonged timelines for utility-scale solar projects on federal lands, where permitting delays are already a major bottleneck. While the order has been challenged in court, in Butterbee Farm v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia last March, it remains in effect.9
Executive Order No. 14260, issued last April, takes a step further by authorizing federal challenges to state climate and clean energy programs, including renewable portfolio standards and renewable energy certificate markets.10 By targeting these state-level frameworks, the order introduces legal uncertainty for developers and investors relying on stable state and regional compliance markets and incentive structures.
Together, these measures increase financial risk, slow project development and undermine the predictability that utility-scale solar needs to scale at pace.
At the same time, trade tensions have escalated sharply. In April, the U.S. Department of Commerce finalized sweeping antidumping and countervailing duties on crystalline silicon cells and modules from Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam, citing subsidies originating in China.11
Rates hit over 3,000% for Cambodian exporters, with triple-digit dumping duties for Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam. Those duties are layered on top of Section 201 safeguard tariffs and the reciprocal tariffs announced earlier in the year, raising costs and heightening supply chain anxiety for developers.
Litigation challenging the duties and tariffs followed swiftly. Litigation in the U.S. Court of International Trade and the D.C. district court argued that such tariffs exceeded the authority granted to the executive under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA.
That statute, the plaintiffs say, does not permit sweeping tariffs that must instead be authorized by Congress. The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in V.O.S. Selections Inc. v. U.S. and Learning Resources Inc. v. U.S. in November, and is expected to deliver a decision that could reshape executive trade authority.12
The financial and operational impacts of the administration’s policies have been immediate. Wood Mackenzie Ltd. data indicates that utility-scale solar project costs may increase by double digits, with battery storage projects facing cost increases of over 12%.13
In several cases — such as Sunnova Energy Corp. and Solar Mosaic — residential solar firms entered bankruptcy in mid-2025, citing weakening demand, higher costs and an uncertain policy environment. While those bankruptcies may reflect company-specific factors to some degree, tightened market conditions no doubt served as a trigger.
On top of these trade challenges, the administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act reshaped the incentive frameworks established under the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act, which the industry had come to rely on.
By imposing new sunset dates and stricter domestic content requirements on existing tax credit structures, the OBBBA reduced the attractiveness of certain projects and introduced added complexity for developers seeking to optimize IRA benefits.
Although intended in part to strengthen U.S. supply chains, these changes have increased compliance burdens and elevated procurement costs and timing risks.
Domestic solar manufacturing was hit as well. Meyer Burger shuttered its Arizona module plant in May, laying off 282 employees after a key offtake agreement fell through.14 The closure underscored the fragility of U.S. solar manufacturing.
Industry leaders emphasize the need for long-term policy stability, which has been undermined on the demand side through executive orders and the administration’s OBBBA legislation, and on the supply side through new foreign entity of concern requirements that affect supply chains.
These headwinds have not, however, fully derailed the industry’s momentum. The U.S. Energy Information Administration projected in February 2025 that the year would see the U.S. add 63 GW of new utility-scale generating capacity, with solar and battery storage together accounting for 81% — including 32.5 GW of solar and 18.2 GW of storage.15
By the end of the third quarter, developers had already installed roughly 30 GW of solar, including over 11 GW of utility-scale solar in the third quarter alone,16 and 4.7 GW of utility-scale storage for almost 11 GW on the year.17
While official data for the fourth quarter has not been released yet, if this momentum continued to the end of 2025, total solar additions could have met or exceeded the 32.5 GW target. And storage installations appear likely to have met expectations, reinforcing the trend toward hybrid projects that deliver reliable, dispatchable clean energy.
Persistent corporate demand has been central to this unlikely growth, with the rapid expansion of data centers emerging as a pillar of sustained demand. In 2025, data centers dominated new corporate clean energy contracts, driven by AI and cloud computing growth.18
Data centers’ need for reliable, quickly deployable power has made solar — especially solar plus storage — a cornerstone of long-term energy strategies. This trend is expected to accelerate as hyperscale facilities seek firm energy supply, reinforcing the case for hybrid projects even as policy volatility encourages caution.
Looking toward 2026, the critical question is whether policy, investment and infrastructure barriers ease enough to support continued scale-up.
On trade, a Supreme Court decision that narrows IEEPA tariff authority or clears the way for refunds could lower supply risks and restore clarity for procurement. Similarly, the possibility of a judicial ruling against the DOI’s new elevated solar and wind review process — though no challenge has been brought to date — could improve permitting outlooks for solar projects on federal land.
A potential case could mirror wind-related suits, using precedent to argue that such added measures exceed lawful executive authority.
Utility-scale solar is no longer a nascent industry — it is a core asset of the U.S. energy system. The fundamental demand drivers, including rising power consumption from data centers and corporate sustainability goals, remain largely intact for now.
Capital should therefore return once investors recalibrate from the policy shocks of 2025. But whether 2026 becomes a year of further growth or gridlock depends on resolving three open fronts: trade, permitting and grid modernization.
The companies that align risk management with these issues — treating policy and infrastructure barriers as solvable design constraints — will lead the next wave of deployment.
If there was one definite signal from 2025, it’s that U.S. solar has ample demand. The central question for 2026 is whether permitting and interconnection can keep pace with that demand — and whether state and federal policies will allow the industry to grow quickly enough to remain competitive amid breakneck data center buildouts.
In this environment, competitiveness is not merely a matter of cost; it is a matter of timing. Developers must deliver solar projects swiftly enough to meet surging electricity needs before alternatives fill the gap.
1 US Solar Market Insight: Q42025 Executive Summary, Wood Mackenzie & Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 3, 2025), https://www.woodmac.com/industry/power-and-renewables/us-solar-market-insight/download-thank-you/?__FormGuid=fa94cd68-ebc0-41ae-8d22-462cbb74f9f7&__FormLanguage=en&__FormSubmissionId=a428d329-0ef1-4391-8c14-ca6507929840.
2 Solar Market Insight Report, Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 9, 2025), https://seia.org/research-resources/us-solar-market-insight/.
3 US Solar Market Insight: Q42025 Executive Summary, Wood Mackenzie & Solar Energy Industries Association (Dec. 3, 2025) at 18, https://www.woodmac.com/industry/power-and-renewables/us-solar-market-insight/download-thank-you/?__FormGuid=fa94cd68-ebc0-41ae-8d22-462cbb74f9f7&__FormLanguage=en&__FormSubmissionId=a428d329-0ef1-4391-8c14-ca6507929840.
4 https://www.energy-storage.news/us-energy-storage-installations-in-2025-have-already-surpassed-last-years-total-wood-mac/.
5 Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects, The White House (Jan. 20, 2025), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/temporary-withdrawal-of-all-areas-on-the-outer-continental-shelf-from-offshore-wind-leasing-and-review-of-the-federal-governments-leasing-and-permitting-practices-for-wind-projects/.
6 State of New York v. Trump, No. 1:25‑cv‑11221‑PBS (D. Mass. Dec. 8, 2025) (Saris, J.), Mem. & Order.
7 Ending Market Distorting Subsidies for Unreliable, Foreign-Controlled Energy Sources, 90 FR 30821, Federal Register (July 9, 2025), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/07/10/2025-12961/ending-market-distorting-subsidies-for-unreliable-foreign-controlled-energy-sources.
8 Departmental Review Procedures for Decisions, Actions, Consultations, and Other Undertakings Related to Wind and Solar Energy Facilities, U.S. Dept. of the Interior (July 15, 2025).
9 Complaint, Butterbee Farm v. USDA, No. 25CV00737, 202 WL 805998 (D.D.C. March 13, 2025).
10 Protecting American Energy from State Overreach, GovInfo (April 8, 2025), https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/DCPD-202500445.
11 Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From Malaysia and Thailand: Amended Final Countervailing Duty Determinations; Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Assembled Into Modules, From Cambodia, Malaysia, Thailand, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam: Countervailing Duty Orders, 90 FR 26791, Federal Register (June 23, 2025), https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/06/24/2025-11589/crystalline-silicon-photovoltaic-cells-whether-or-not-assembled-into-modules-from-malaysia-and.
12 See V.O.S. Selections Inc. v. U.S., No. 24-1132 (U.S. argued Nov. 5, 2025); Learning Resources Inc. v. U.S., No. 24-1127 (U.S. argued Nov. 5, 2025).
13 Tariffs to increase costs and slow down development for US power industry, Wood Mackenzie (June 02, 2025), https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/tariffs-to-increase-costs-and-slow-down-development-for-us-power-industry/.
14 Meyer Burger shuts down solar module production and lays off 282 employees in the U.S., Meyer Burger (May 29, 2025), https://www.meyerburger.com/en/newsroom/artikel/meyer-burger-shuts-down-solar-module-production-and-lays-off-282-employees-in-the-us.
15 Solar, battery storage to lead new U.S. generating capacity additions in 2025, U.S. Energy Information Administration (Feb. 24, 2025).
16 https://seia.org/news/third-largest-quarter-on-record/.
17 https://www.energy-storage.news/us-energy-storage-installations-in-2025-have-already-surpassed-last-years-total-wood-mac/.
18 US Tech Companies Contract 48GW of Clean Energy Year on Year Amid AI Boom – Report, Data Center Dynamics (March 3, 2025), https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/us-tech-contracts-48gw-of-clean-energy-year-on-year-amid-ai-boom-report/#:~:text=Energy%20&%20Sustainability%20Channel-,US%20tech%20companies%
20contract%2048GW%20of%20clean%20energy%20year%20on,power%20sources%20for%20their%20operations
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC
