Woodward says "protracted litigation benefits neither" side
Associate Attorney General of the United States
“protracted litigation benefits neither, and I am proud to have helped facilitate today's historic deals that advance the President's Energy Dominance Agenda”
Source and context
Official statement
About this source
Department of the Interior press release announcing settlement agreements to cancel Bluepoint Wind's and Golden State Wind's offshore wind leases, with quotes from Secretary Burgum and Associate Attorney General Woodward.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Woodward spoke as Interior announced settlement agreements with Bluepoint Wind and Golden State Wind on the same terms as the earlier TotalEnergies deal.
After the quotation
Woodward added that under the agreements, American taxpayers would be the beneficiary rather than a source of continued subsidies for the projects.
How this statement is classified
Case context: Did the Interior Department's offshore wind lease-cancellation payments comply with the Judgment Fund Act?
The label describes this statement’s response within the context above.
Why this label?
Woodward frames the settlements as the product of a legitimate litigation dispute the Justice Department resolved, defending the settlement process against claims that no real dispute existed to settle.
- Recorded on
- Published here
Did the Interior Department's offshore wind lease-cancellation payments comply with the Judgment Fund Act?
Explore the case context, sources and public responses.
More from this case
Read the full case“President Trump is trying to send $111 million to his fossil fuel industry friends and wants taxpayers and working families to cover the tab.”Read statement
“These illegal backroom deals take money that should have gone toward lowering New Yorkers' bills and hand it to fossil fuel projects in other states, all while our energy demand continues to grow.”Read statement
“The use of congressionally appropriated funds, potentially in violation of the Antideficiency Act, to pay private companies to cancel clean energy projects on the condition that they invest in fossil fuel ventures appears to be quid pro quo. ... You have furnished these reimbursements through the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Judgment Fund, which was created to pay valid judgement and settlements where the United States is the defendant. The details of these agreements make clear that your payment structure does not meet the statutory requirements governing use of the Judgment Fund: DOI has identified no final judgment, Attorney General-approved compromise of a referred claim, or money-damages liability that would make this payment eligible for the Judgment Fund under 31 U.S.C. § 1304 or 28 U.S.C. § 2414.”Read statement