Court vacates Trump Admin's “Emergency” Order requiring coal plant to continue operations
On September 11, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a Department of Energy (DOE) "emergency" order requiring the Campbell coal plant in western Michigan to remain in operation past its scheduled retirement date, at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. The Court’s decision comes after CUB joined other consumer and environmental advocates from across the Midwest in advocating for this result.
This decision will potentially save Midwestern ratepayers—including Minnesotans—from paying millions in unnecessary charges to keep the coal plant running. But we aren’t out of the woods yet. Keep reading to learn more about what led to the Court’s decision and what is likely to come next.
What’s happened so far?
In 2022, after a lengthy regulatory process involving 29 parties, the Michigan Public Service Commission (the Michigan Commission) approved electric utility, Consumers Energy’s plan to retire the Campbell Plant by May 2025. Meanwhile, the Michigan Commission also approved Consumers Energy’s plans to invest in other infrastructure to replace the Campbell Plant—infrastructure that can generate electricity more cleanly and cost-effectively than an aging coal facility. The midcontinent grid operator, MISO, determined that the region has plenty of generating capacity to meet customer demand, even with the Plant’s retirement.
On May 23, 2025—just one week before the Campbell Plant’s long-planned retirement date—U.S. Energy Secretary, Chris Wright, issued an “emergency order” directing Consumers Energy to continue operating the Campbell Plant. The order states, without evidence, that “an emergency exists in portions of the Midwest region of the United States due to a shortage of electric energy, a shortage of facilities for the generation of electricity, and other causes.” The DOE’s order (which was subsequently extended six times) was one of several similar orders the Trump Administration has since issued to require retiring coal plans to continue operating around the country.
After the DOE order, Consumers Energy became concerned about whether and how it could recover the costs of operating the plant. In an attempt to address this concern, Consumers Energy filed a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) requesting permission to spread out the costs of operating the Campbell Plant across the entire MISO footprint, which includes Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, the Dakotas and portions of several other states. FERC approved this request in August 2025.
According to a July 28 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Consumers Energy has now incurred over $259 million in net costs to keep the Campbell Plant running beyond its scheduled retirement date.
How are CUB and other consumer advocates pushing back?
CUB has joined efforts to challenge both the DOE’s “emergency” order and Consumers Energy’s requests to charge Minnesotans for its operation of the Campbell Plant.
The emergency that wasn’t an emergency
Last year, we joined the Citizens Utility Boards of Michigan and Wisconsin, the Consumers Council of Missouri, and the Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana to file an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. recommending that the DOE Order be vacated. In the brief, we argued that the DOE had not proven that an emergency exists that would require the Campbell Plant to continue operating, that the DOE ignored years of careful planning and state regulatory approvals that preceded the retirement of the Plant, and that the DOE failed to consider the financial impact its Order would have on utility ratepayers.
Ultimately, the Court agreed, noting: “The [DOE’s] reading of ‘emergency’ invites frequent federal interventions that are unsupported by the statute and threaten the stability of the energy market.” However, the decision does not necessarily mean the Campbell Plant will immediately cease operations. Consumers Energy indicated in a statement that it intends to keep the plant operating through mid-November while it reviews the decision. The Trump Administration continues to defend the necessity of the emergency order but has not yet announced whether it plans to appeal the Appellate Court’s decision. If it does, this case could go on to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The fight over cost recovery continues
Meanwhile, Consumers Energy has requested FERC’s approval to recover its costs of operating the Campbell Plant from consumers across the Midwest.
Last month, CUB joined the Environmental Law & Policy Center, the Citizens Utility Boards of Illinois and Wisconsin, Citizens Action Coalition of Indiana, Inc., Public Citizen, and Sierra Club in filing a joint motion recommending that FERC deny Consumers Energy’s request to recover the costs associated with keeping the Campbell Plant running from consumers across the upper Midwest. In our joint filing, we argued Consumers Energy has not demonstrated that its requested cost recovery is just and reasonable. We specifically opposed Consumers Energy’s request to incorporate a 9.9 authorized rate of return into the costs it recovers from consumers. This filing follows an earlier, June 2025 FERC filing, where CUB joined other parties in raising concerns about the impacts of the DOE Order.
The outcome of these ongoing proceedings will determine whether Minnesotans will be among those on the hook for paying for the Campbell Plant’s ongoing operations. Though the exact amount that may be charged to Minnesotans is unclear, it could be significant if Consumers Energy is permitted to recover the full $259+ million in net costs it has incurred so far.
CUB will continue to advocate for Minnesotans throughout that process. Keep an eye on our website for additional updates.