WASHINGTON— The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has agreed to rehear, en banc, a lawsuit challenging the Environmental Protection Agency’s termination of billions of dollars in clean-energy financing awards, including a $1.87 billion grant awarded to Inclusiv.
In an order issued Tuesday, the full appeals court granted an emergency request from Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) awardees to reconsider an earlier divided panel decision that vacated a preliminary injunction blocking the EPA’s actions. The court scheduled oral arguments for Feb. 24, 2026, Inclusiv stated in a release.
The case centers on the EPA’s March 2025 attempt to terminate awards made under the Clean Communities Investment Accelerator (CCIA) and National Clean Investment Fund (NCIF), programs created and funded by Congress as part of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. Inclusiv, a community development organization that works closely with credit unions and community lenders, is among the recipients affected.
While the litigation proceeds, the disputed grant funds remain frozen at Citibank.
The legal dispute has moved through multiple courts since spring. On March 11, 2025, the EPA sought to terminate Inclusiv’s award and those of seven other organizations. Inclusiv subsequently filed suit against the EPA and Citibank in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.
On April 15, U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan issued a preliminary injunction barring the EPA from terminating the awards, finding the agency’s actions unlawful. The EPA appealed that ruling to the D.C. Circuit.
In September, a divided three-judge panel ruled 2–1 that the district court lacked jurisdiction and that the case should instead be heard by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, vacating the injunction. The plaintiffs filed an emergency petition days later seeking en banc review—a request the full court granted this week.
The outcome of the rehearing could determine whether the preliminary injunction blocking the EPA’s termination of the GGRF awards is reinstated and which court ultimately has jurisdiction over the dispute.