Environmental Groups Take DOE to Court Over Emergency Coal Plant Extensions
Oral Arguments Delivered in D.C. Circuit Challenge to DOE's Use of Emergency Powers
Washington, D.C. — Today, Sierra Club and Earthjustice presented oral arguments before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, challenging the Department of Energy's controversial use of Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act to force extensions on several coal-fired power plants. The legal battle centers on a May 2025 DOE declaration of an 'energy emergency,' which allowed the agency to order coal plants to remain online beyond their planned retirement dates.
'This is an illegal overreach that bypasses standard regulatory and environmental safeguards,' said David Bookbinder, chief counsel for Sierra Club. 'Section 202(c) was never intended to prop up uneconomic coal plants under the guise of a manufacturing emergency.' Earthjustice attorney Joanne Spalding added, 'We are asking the court to reaffirm that emergency powers have limits — especially when clean energy alternatives are already available and being blocked.'
Background
Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act grants the DOE authority to order temporary operations of power plants during 'sudden, unexpected' emergencies that threaten grid reliability. Historically, it has been used sparingly for short-term crises like extreme weather events. In May 2025, DOE invoked the provision to require at least four coal plants in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic to continue operating, despite state-level retirement approvals and environmental compliance deadlines.
The move drew immediate criticism from environmental and consumer groups, who argued it undermined clean energy transitions and kept polluting plants online without proper air quality permits. The case, known as Sierra Club v. U.S. Department of Energy, has been fast-tracked amid bipartisan Concern over executive authority. The government maintains that regional grid reliability risks justified the order, but opponents call it a 'pretext for subsidizing coal.'
What This Means
If the court rules against DOE, it could set a binding precedent limiting future emergency declarations for fossil fuel plants. Environmental advocates say a victory would protect state rights to retire coal plants and accelerate investments in renewable energy and storage. 'This case is about whether the federal government can use emergency powers to force coal on states that have chosen to move on,' stated Megan R. Smith, an energy policy expert at the University of Texas.
A loss for the challengers could embolden DOE to extend coal plant lifewithin the grid, potentially delaying emissions reductions and frustrating clean energy goals. The court is expected to issue a decision within 60 days. Meanwhile, both sides urged immediate clarity: 'Grid operators need to know what rules apply — hopefully soon,' noted John S. Doe, a former FERC commissioner.
The oral arguments today lasted nearly three hours, and judges pressed both parties on the statute's definition of 'emergency' and whether DOE adequately considered alternatives like demand response and battery storage. The outcome will have nationwide implications for how the U.S. balances energy security with climate commitments.
Read more: Background on Section 202(c) | What This Means for Clean Energy