The Trump administration’s decision to revoke approval for the 2.2-GW Maryland Offshore Wind project highlights how the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) has become a key battleground in the U.S. energy transition. Historically applied to offshore oil and gas, OCSLA is now central to legal disputes over offshore wind, shaping the fate of billion-dollar projects and raising questions about the adaptability of laws written more than half a century ago.
Enacted in 1953, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act was designed to regulate energy development on the U.S. outer continental shelf beyond state-controlled waters. For decades, its primary purpose was to oversee leasing, environmental review, and construction of offshore oil and gas projects. The law gave the federal government clear authority to balance national energy needs with environmental safeguards.
Historically, litigation under OCSLA has centered on lease suspensions and environmental compliance. After the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster, OCSLA was invoked in court challenges over drilling moratoriums, environmental assessments, and the pace of permitting. Courts often deferred to agency discretion, reinforcing OCSLA as a stable and frequently contested framework for offshore fossil fuel development.
This history established predictability for oil and gas operators. They knew legal battles would occur but could generally expect that OCSLA would favor continued development with improved oversight. The law’s role was clear: enable offshore resource extraction while imposing federally mandated safety and environmental checks.
Today, OCSLA’s provisions are being tested in ways its drafters likely never imagined. Offshore wind projects, which rely on the same leasing and permitting structure, are increasingly facing lawsuits citing OCSLA as grounds for reversal. The most prominent example is the Maryland Offshore Wind project, a 2.2-GW development off the coasts of Maryland and Delaware. In August 2025, the Department of the Interior announced it would reevaluate its approval of the project’s construction and operations plan under OCSLA and seek a court remand.
The project has drawn multiple legal challenges. A Delaware property owner argued that the project’s approval violated the Coastal Zone Management Act, while Ocean City officials filed complaints that the approval contradicted OCSLA, the Administrative Procedure Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. In response, Interior acknowledged that reevaluating the COP under OCSLA could render many of these claims moot.
This move is not isolated. Earlier in 2025, the Trump administration halted work on Revolution Wind, a 700-MW project intended to supply Rhode Island and Connecticut, and Empire Wind 1, an 810-MW project off New York. Both cases involved OCSLA-based reviews and stop-work orders. These delays have cost developers millions per week and created uncertainty across the offshore wind sector. Industry analysts warn that frequent invocation of OCSLA in legal disputes undermines investor confidence and jeopardizes the timelines of critical clean energy projects.
The contrast between how OCSLA applies to oil and gas versus offshore wind is stark. For oil and gas, OCSLA has been a framework that generally enabled development, with litigation focusing on environmental mitigation. The national narrative framed offshore drilling as an energy security necessity, making courts and policymakers more inclined to sustain projects despite challenges.
Offshore wind, however, faces different dynamics. Stakeholder opposition often comes not from national energy security advocates, but from coastal municipalities, property owners, and local interest groups. These parties use OCSLA to argue that federal approvals overstep statutory authority or inadequately account for environmental and coastal impacts. Unlike fossil fuel development, offshore wind is deeply tied to climate and renewable energy policies, which shift dramatically between administrations.
This has created a new legal landscape where OCSLA is being stretched to cover renewable energy projects in ways never envisioned in the 1950s. Offshore wind developers now face an uncertain regulatory environment in which each project could become a test case for OCSLA’s interpretation.
As more offshore wind projects advance, litigation under OCSLA is expected to increase. Each case introduces risk for developers who must navigate shifting political priorities, regulatory reinterpretations, and judicial scrutiny. This uncertainty threatens billions of dollars in private investment and slows the U.S. path toward decarbonization goals, including the Biden-era targets of achieving a 100% clean electricity grid by 2035 and reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions economy-wide by 2050.
Some legal scholars and policymakers argue that OCSLA needs to be modernized to explicitly incorporate offshore renewable energy. While the Energy Policy Act of 2005 extended OCSLA’s reach to cover renewables, ambiguities remain about how its provisions apply to large-scale offshore wind. Clarifying statutory language or creating a renewable-specific regulatory framework could reduce litigation and provide investors with greater confidence.
Court rulings on current disputes will set powerful precedents. If courts affirm broad agency discretion under OCSLA for offshore wind, developers may gain stability similar to that enjoyed by oil and gas operators in past decades. Conversely, if courts strike down approvals, offshore wind could remain mired in legal battles, delaying projects critical to climate and energy policy.
The Trump administration’s revocation of approval for the Maryland Offshore Wind project underscores how the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act remains at the heart of U.S. offshore energy disputes. Originally crafted for oil and gas, the law now serves as a pivotal tool in challenges to renewable energy. As the U.S. seeks to expand offshore wind capacity, the interpretation of OCSLA will determine whether the legal framework supports or constrains the energy transition. The coming years will reveal whether OCSLA can adapt to a new era of offshore development or whether legislative reform is needed to bridge the gap between fossil fuel past and renewable future.
The expansion of Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum is intensifying inflationary pressures across consumer goods, from household appliances to industrial equipment. With import levies now as high as 50%, businesses and consumers alike are feeling the ripple effects.
