Texas GOP Gov. Greg Abbott delivered an address to the state’s Republican County chairs on Friday and addressed the recent move to install floating barriers along the Rio Grande as part of an effort to reduce illegal immigration.

During his speech in Georgetown, Texas, Abbott spoke about his administration’s response to the influx of migrants entering the state illegally through the U.S.-Mexico border, according to Fox 7.

‘I will do whatever I have to do to defend our state from the invasion of the Mexican drug cartels and others who have tried to come into our country illegally, and I will protect our sovereignty,’ Abbott said.

The governor touted his recent decision to have a floating border wall built in the Rio Grande as part of Operation Lone Star.

‘It’s called operation hold the line,’ he said. ‘They are holding the line and ensuring that nobody enters the state of Texas illegally.’

The Department of Justice announced a lawsuit against Texas after Abbott refuse to remove the buoys. The department accused the governor of violating federal law, calling his one-thousand-foot-long barrier ‘unlawful construction.’

This comes as Texas continues to send buses of migrants to sanctuary cities across the country, including New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. Abbott has previously said the migrant relocations will not stop until the federal government fixes the crisis at the Southern Border.

‘I challenge the federal government to show that they have spent that much money in the state of Texas on the border under Joe Biden as president,’ Abbott said on Friday.

‘He gave me a lawsuit, and by God, Joe Biden, we will see you in court,’ he added.

Demonstrators were outside the governor’s mansion in Austin on Friday to protest against Abbott’s floating border wall.

–>

Virginia Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat, has told multiple people within her party that she intends to run in the commonwealth’s gubernatorial election in 2025.

The centrist Democrat has been preparing for a run for the governor’s office for months or even years but more recently began making her political ambitions clearer. Spanberger and one of her top political aides told four Democrats that she is planning to make a run for governor in the next election, POLITICO reported, citing people familiar with the conversations.

Spanberger’s team has also been speaking to congressional colleagues about her plans for a gubernatorial run, two Democratic lawmakers told the outlet.

Virginia’s current GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin will vacate the governor’s mansion following the 2025 election because governors in the commonwealth may not serve consecutive terms.

An announcement from Spanberger would likely not come until after Virginia’s highly competitive state legislative elections this November. The congresswoman’s ambitions and the timeline for a potential announcement could hurt Democrats’ chances of retaking the U.S. House in 2024, as the party needs to hold onto the seat in Spanberger’s competitive district if they hope to win back control of the lower chamber.

President Biden won Spanberger’s district by six points in the 2020 presidential election.

Spanberger can run for reelection to her House seat and launch a campaign for governor after that election. But both the congresswoman and one of her aides told two Virginia Democrats last spring that she does not plan to seek a fourth term in Congress, two people familiar with those conversations told POLITICO.

‘As every Democrat in Virginia should be, Abigail is squarely focused on the 2023 General Assembly races,’ a spokesperson for Spanberger’s office told the outlet.

Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney and former Virginia House Speaker Eileen Filler-Corn are among the other Democrats most likely to enter the governor’s race.

Spanberger, a powerful fundraiser, raised more than $9 million in the 2022 election cycle. But she only has $1.2 million in donor money in 2023 for her congressional reelection as of the end of June, according to POLITICO. And since Virginia has few limits on who can donate or how much, along with the commonwealth’s lax campaign finance laws, Spanberger can allocate funds raised for her congressional race to run for governor.

The former CIA officer first won her House seat by a narrow margin five years ago when she defeated GOP Rep. Dave Brat. She has been a leading moderate voice in the Democratic Party on fiscal reform, police funding and other issues.

Virginia holds primaries in June and some Democrats say they would prefer to have an open House seat in a presidential year instead of an unpredictable special election later in the event that Spanberger wins reelection next year and the governor’s race in 2025, when her congressional seat would be more vulnerable.

If Spanberger does vacate her House seat, there are several Democratic contenders expected to explore a run in her district, including former state Dels. Jennifer Carroll Foy and Hala Ayala, and state Sen. Jeremy McPike. For Republicans, businessman Bill Moher is the only one who has begun fundraising in the district.

–>

House Republicans have gotten a cold shoulder from the White House after demanding answers about President Biden’s knowledge of Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings.

In a July 20 letter to White House counsel Stuart Delery, four prominent Republicans in the House — GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith, R-Mo. — pressed for answers after the Biden administration shifted its messaging about the president’s knowledge of Hunter Biden’s business interests.

The lawmakers, expressing ‘concern over President Biden’s involvement with Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings,’ said in the letter, which was first reported by the New York Post, the issue raises ‘national security and ethics concerns.’

‘President Biden and official White House spokespersons have said repeatedly that the President had no knowledge of his son’s business, nor did he discuss business with his son,’ the Republicans wrote.

 ‘However, on June 29, 2023, Ian Sams, a spokesperson for the White House Counsel’s office, released a statement saying, ‘As we have said many times before, the President was not in business with his son.’

‘This statement deviates from previous White House statements and brings forward concerns that the President knew of his son’s foreign business deals.’

The lawmakers also included in the letter a string of questions for the White House counsel’s office and requested a response by July 27. That request, however, was ignored by the White House.

Two questions asked by the GOP lawmakers: ‘Is the White House now admitting President Biden knew of and was involved in Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings’ and ‘What was President Biden’s involvement in these foreign business dealings?’

The lawmakers also sought to find out whether the Justice Department has ‘an open investigation regarding the uncovered WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden to a CEFC China Energy official.’

‘No matter how many times the White House desperately tries to cover up for Joe Biden, it is an indisputable fact that the White House has changed its position on Joe Biden’s knowledge of and involvement in Hunter Biden’s foreign business dealings,’ Stefanik told The Post.

‘The Biden administration’s continued stonewalling of House Republicans’ investigations into the Biden family influence peddling scheme and Joe Biden’s involvement will not deter us. We will leave no stone unturned and use every tool at our disposal to deliver accountability.’

During an appearance on FOX Business Thursday, Stefanik made similar comments when she told a ‘Mornings with Maria’ panel she would ‘absolutely’ support the opening of an impeachment inquiry into Biden.

Asked whether she would support a potential impeachment inquiry, Stefanik responded, ‘Oh, absolutely. I’m in conversations with Speaker (Kevin) McCarthy and all of our members. The important thing to know about an impeachment inquiry is that it ensures that the House is at the apex of its power and oversight responsibility. It means that our subpoenas have the most power possible when it comes to litigating this out in court because we know getting the facts is not going to be easy.

‘We know this White House, this Department of Justice, they are trying to cover up for Hunter Biden and, ultimately, Joe Biden. What is important that you mentioned at the beginning of your statement is the White House is trying to quietly change its language. First it said that Joe Biden never spoke to his son about Hunter’s business dealings. They have now changed that language to now saying Joe Biden has never been in business with Hunter Biden’s business operations. That is a significant change. … 

‘It is only because of House Republicans that we’ve discovered the dozens of LLCs, which is illegal money laundering, the fact that nearly 20 Biden family members have profited illegally.’

McCarthy said this week that Republican lawmakers in the House may consider an impeachment inquiry of Biden over claims of financial misconduct.

Speaking Tuesday at the Capitol, McCarthy said the questions that House Republicans are raising about the Biden family finances need to be investigated. He said an impeachment inquiry ‘allows Congress to get the information to be able to know the truth’ about whether Biden committed any wrongdoing.

An impeachment inquiry by the House would be a first step toward bringing articles of impeachment. Such a probe could be as lengthy or swift as the House determines, potentially stretching into campaign season.

Speaking to Fox News Digital about the subject earlier this week, McCarthy said his party will, for now, continue seeking information related to the Biden family finances unless that information began being withheld.

‘What I’ve said is if they withhold information, the impeachment inquiry allows Congress to have the apex of power to get all the information they need. All this information people are finding out now is only because Republicans have investigated,’ McCarthy said.

‘The people of America have a right to know what went on. They have a president who lied to the American public and said they didn’t get any money from China. We know that’s true. We’ve had whistleblowers from the IRS come say the Biden family is treated differently and that other things were going on. And then you have a[n] informant with the FBI saying there was a bribe. We need to know the answer to this.’

The White House did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Fox News’ Brandon Gillespie and Charles Creitz, and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Disputes among House Republicans over spending cuts and abortion policy forced House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to scrap a vote planned for this week on one of 12 major funding bills for the next fiscal year.

The agriculture spending bill was expected to hit the House floor late this week, but lawmakers instead went home without any vote – a sign that Republicans may struggle to find agreement in their own party on these issues.

On the question of spending, members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus have been pushing for a total of $1.47 trillion in discretionary spending next year, while House GOP leaders set out a total of $1.58 trillion and have proposed funding bills based on that higher level.

When the agriculture spending bill came up this week, it became clear that conservative lawmakers couldn’t support that specific bill or the broader GOP leadership plan. The decision to delay the vote sparked anger from rural Republicans, who said the party shouldn’t be looking to cut any more from the agriculture bill.

‘I just have very serious concerns of when you absolutely gut an [agriculture] appropriations bill, I mean, it has catastrophic effects on the safety of our food, cuts USDA inspectors, [affects] the export market – cutting important programs’ said Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, who represents a heavily Republican rural district.

‘It’s also catastrophic for our animal disease control – right now we’re trying stop . . . African Swine Fever, and when you gut this bill, you no longer have the funds to protect our animals here in the U.S.,’ he said.

Feenstra was careful not to directly blame the Freedom Caucus or its allies to Fox News Digital, but warned, ‘Whoever wants to take a big whack at this’ that they were affecting ‘the breadbasket of the world.’

Abortion policy was another point of division in the GOP this week. The agriculture bill included language that would curb access to mail-order abortion pills, a provision that conservatives said would be needed to secure their vote.

But the inclusion of that language is a problem for other Republicans.

‘Some in the Freedom Caucus wanted significantly more spending cuts than were agreed upon. And so that is a big factor in this, as well as some of the language related to abortion that many of us expressed concerns about. And so those are coming forward,’ said freshman Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who last year took a seat held by a Democrat.

Freedom Caucus members defended their positions that upended the GOP schedule this week.

Rep. Bob Good, R-Va., said it’s ‘certainly not true’ that the cuts they are calling for would derail valuable programs. ‘Let me clarify, [agriculture] is, other than the military [and veterans bill], is the one with the very least amount of cuts,’ Good said.

Good also repeated the Freedom Caucus demand that they need to see what all 12 spending bills look like before they can start supporting them on the House floor.

‘We want to know how all the bills fit together, how the whole puzzle fits together before we go down the road with, you know, some bills, and we don’t know we’ve got the cuts in place for the remaining bills,’ he said. ‘And as it applies to [agriculture] specifically, we want to maintain all the conservative policy that’s been in there.’

Freedom Caucus Policy Chair Chip Roy, R-Texas, agreed that a full view of the spending picture is needed before anything else happens. When asked to respond to the comments from rural Republicans, Roy said, ‘Get in a room, and figure out how to get the cuts we need across the board.’

‘We need to stop spending money we don’t have, we need to cut the bureaucracy. You want more money in ag? Go take it from [Health and Human Services]. If you want more money in HHS, go take it from [Department of Homeland Security]. I mean, that’s the way you do your budget at home,’ Roy said.

On the abortion pill provision currently in the bill, Roy said, ‘It’s definitely a problem if that’s not taken care of.’

Rep. Ben Cline, R-Va., also challenged the notion that cuts the Freedom Caucus was seeking could be harmful, and suggested that specific reductions were suggested to House GOP leaders.

‘The idea that there’s no waste or bloat in the bureaucracy is ludicrous . . . in the [agriculture] bill, we have found some of it, quite a lot of it, actually,’ Cline told Fox News Digital. ‘We identified for leadership exactly where those areas are, and hopefully we can find a consensus that gets us across the finish line.’

With Friday’s canceled vote, House lawmakers now have from Sept. 12 until Sept. 30 to pass the remaining 11 of 12 spending bills or some other form of appropriations for the next fiscal year, or risk a partial government shutdown. Earlier in the week, the House managed to pass a bill funding veterans and military construction, which reflects the broad GOP consensus for higher spending levels for veterans.

Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., the leader of the Main Street Caucus and a top ally of Speaker Kevin McCarthy, downplayed the GOP discord and expressed confidence that the House GOP could come together in time.

‘This is a pretty conservative Republican conference. Most of us ran explicitly, because we wanted to, in a meaningful way, address that $32 trillion debt. And we’re not going to be able to get that done without some decisions that are going to pinch some pretty important programs,’ he said.

‘Now, exactly what those reductions look like, and to exactly what programs, we’re still working that out. But I would tell you, we’re making progress. It’s not going quickly in any given day. But every day, I feel a little bit better about our chances to get there.’

New York and California experienced the largest loss of tax income from migration of any states in the country as residents fled the deep-blue havens in droves, according to a new study that also found that Texas and Florida got the biggest IRS tax benefits from people moving in.

MyEListing.com, an online real estate portal, conducted a study of IRS migration data and found that California lost more than $340 million in 2021 IRS tax revenue due to residents moving.

‘Despite its numerous attractions, from the booming tech industry and world-class universities to beautiful landscapes and cultural richness, California’s high personal income tax rates seem discouraging for many high-wealth individuals,’ MyEListing wrote in its analysis. ‘This, coupled with the state’s high cost of living, will likely fuel a wealth migration out of California.’

From January 2020 to July 2022, the state lost well over half a million people, with the number of residents leaving surpassing those moving in by almost 700,000. The U-Haul Growth Index, which measured more than two million one-way trips last year, found that California ranked last on the index as demand for trucks out of the Golden State spiked.

California’s exodus is having real consequences. In 2021, the state lost a House seat for the first time since it achieved statehood in 1850. If the population continues to decline, another one could be at risk.

Another effect of fewer people, as reflected in MyEListing’s findings, is an erosion of California’s tax base, already one of the country’s most taxed populations with the nation’s highest top income tax rate at 13.3% among other onerous taxes.

In May, California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that the state’s budget deficit had grown to nearly $32 billion, which is about $10 billion more than he anticipated in January when he offered his first budget proposal. One reason for the higher figure was lower-than-expected tax revenue.

The problem may only get worse. More than 40% of Californians are considering leaving the Golden State, according to a new poll from a consortium of California nonprofits. Almost a third of residents said their urge to leave was fueled by California’s liberal politics.

A high cost of living is another major factor for many. Some have also cited other social and cultural factors, such as the homeless crisis that is devastating major cities such as Los Angeles. 

LA has seen a growing number of homeless encampments popping up along the streets of the city, coinciding with rising crime rates and creating scenes of trash, needles and even human feces and urine in public areas. Many business owners have complained, expressing outrage about such encampments being close to their establishments and potentially driving away customers.

Still, Newsom defended his state and expressed optimism about the future despite a declining population.

‘I love this state,’ Newsom said recently during an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity. ‘Don’t count us out.’

Newsom added that, per capita, ‘more Floridians move to California than California is moving to Florida.’

Last year, however, Florida saw the biggest rush of new residents migrating from predominantly blue states with steep taxes, with about 319,000 Americans making the move there, according to data from the National Association of Realtors. That amounts to a population increase of nearly 2%, well above the 0.4% national growth rate in the U.S. from July 2021 to July 2022.

According to MyEListing’s study, Florida experienced a $12.4 billion increase in tax revenue, topping the list for capturing the most income from residents fleeing other states.

‘High-income earners are increasingly choosing the Sunshine State, reflecting an age-old economic axiom: Money goes where it is treated best,’ the study stated.

Texas, another popular destination for moving Californians, came just behind in second place, drawing $10.7 billion in new revenue from migrating residents.

Arizona rounded out the top three with $9.4 billion.

As for the states that lost the most tax money due to migration, New York experienced the second-biggest drop next to California, losing just under $300 million from its yearly tax base. A separate study by WalletHub found recently that New York imposes the most burdensome taxes on its residents of all the country’s 50 states.

Beyond New York and California, other deep-blue Democratic strongholds rounded out the five states whose tax bases have suffered most from residents leaving: Illinois, which lost nearly $142 million in tax revenue; New Jersey, which lost $135 million; and Massachusetts, which lost $129 million.

The 10 states with the highest taxes lost nearly one in 100 residents in net domestic migration between July 2021 and July 2022, while the 10 states with the lowest taxes gained almost one in 100, according to a recent analysis by James Doti, president emeritus and economics professor at Chapman University. 

‘The latest census has shown that the highest tax states — California, New York and Illinois — have all seen massive population exodus,’ Nicholas Robinson, director of accountancy at Illinois University, recently told WalletHub. ‘The states that have grown the most, Florida and Texas, do not have an income tax. The benefits or detriments of being in a high-tax state versus a low-tax state could be assessed by the population voting with its feet.’

Overall, California lost $29 billion in adjusted gross income from migration out of the state in 2021 after losing $18 billion in 2020, according to IRS data. New York state lost $25 billion in 2021 and $20 billion in 2020.

Florida, meanwhile, brought in $39 billion in income during 2021 — a 39% increase from the $28 billion the year before. Nearly a third of that gain came from New York.

Texas added $11 billion in income in 2021, with $5 billion of that coming from fleeing Californians.

Former President Donald Trump has vowed to continue his 2024 White House run even if he is convicted and sentenced on criminal charges.

Trump made the promise during a Friday appearance on ‘The John Fredricks Show,’ a pro-Trump radio program, when asked whether his potential conviction would terminate his second bid for the White House.

‘Not at all. There’s nothing in the Constitution to say that it could,’ Trump said. ‘Even the radical left crazies are saying, ‘No, that wouldn’t stop!’ And it wouldn’t stop me either.’

Trump is currently facing multiple state and federal charges, including 34 counts of falsifying business records in New York, and 37 federal charges stemming from Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation into his alleged improper retention of classified records at his Mar-a-Lago home.

He pled ‘not guilty’ to the New York charges in April and the federal charges in June.

Trump is also facing potential indictments in the federal investigation into his alleged role in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, as well as Georgia’s investigation into ‘possible criminal interference in the administration of Georgia’s 2020 general election.’

Trump maintains that each of the investigations are part of a partisan political ‘witch hunt.’ 

He is currently the front-runner in the race for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, with polls showing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis coming in a distant second.

The White House on Friday announced that it has agreed to accept Cuban, Nicaraguan, Haitian and Venezuelan nationals who are living in Mexico as refugee resettlement referrals, the latest in the administration’s strategy of allowing more migrants in through more legal ‘pathways’ to reduce chaos at the southern border.

White House national security adviser Jake Sullivan announced that after a meeting between Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador and a U.S. delegation, the U.S. has committed to expanding ‘access to safe, orderly, legal migration pathways’

Mexico will be establishing an ‘international multipurpose space’ to offer ‘new refugee and labor options for the most vulnerable people who are currently in Mexico.’

‘We also commit to accept refugee resettlement referrals from qualified individuals from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela who are already in Mexico,’ Sullivan said.

Those in refugee resettlement are put on a path to permanent residency and eventual U.S. citizenship. The Biden administration has dramatically increased the refugee cap to 125,000 — significantly higher than the 18,000 in the final fiscal year of the Trump administration.

It marks the latest move to provide additional pathways for migrants to get into the U.S. beyond the regular visa system. The administration announced in January a humanitarian parole program that allows up to 30,000 migrants from those four countries to fly directly into the U.S.

Separately, the U.S. is allowing up to 1,450 migrants each day into the U.S. via parole if they have set up an appointment at a port of entry at the southern border using the CBP One app.

Republicans have strongly criticized the expansion, accusing the administration of abusing parole — which Congress has determined should be used on a ‘case-by-case’ basis for urgent humanitarian reasons and significant public benefit — to allow otherwise-illegal migrants into the U.S. 

Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., told Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas at a House hearing this week that the app was a ‘Disney Fast Pass’ into the country and accused him of digitizing illegal immigration.

‘You’ve taken this app, and you’ve digitized illegal immigration. And you’ve scaled it to the moon,’ Gaetz said. ‘This app that you’ve got everybody downloading is like the Disney Fast Pass into the country, never to be subject to actual removal, just ‘removal proceedings,’ as you call them.’

‘We have used our parole authority consistent with the law and consistent with past practices of different administrations,’ Mayorkas said.

Mayorkas also used the hearing to say the strategy is working, pointing to a sharp drop in migrant numbers in June.

‘Our approach to managing the borders securely and humanely even within our fundamentally broken immigration system is working,’ he said. ‘Unlawful entries between ports of entry along the southwest border have consistently decreased by more than half compared to the peak before the end of Title 42.’

‘Under President Biden’s leadership, we have led the largest expansion of lawful, safe and orderly pathways for people to seek humanitarian relief under our laws. At the same time, imposing tougher consequences on those who instead resort to the ruthless smuggling organizations that prey on the most vulnerable,’ he added.

Sullivan, in his statement on Friday, noted that the administration ‘has significantly expanded legal pathways to the United States’ and that it is part of the administration’s border control strategy — which combines what it says are tougher consequences at the border than before the end of Title 42 in May.

‘We encourage migrants to use these legal pathways instead of putting their lives in the hands of dangerous smugglers and traffickers. Pursuant to our laws, those seeking to enter the United States unlawfully will continue to face strong consequences, including removal, possible criminal prosecution, and a bar on reentry,’ he said.

The administration’s stick in the carrot-and-stick approach comes in the form of renewed Title 8 authorities — including the use of expedited removal — and an asylum rule that bars migrants from claiming asylum if they entered illegally and failed to claim asylum in a prior country.

However, that rule was blocked this week by a federal judge in response to a lawsuit from left-wing activist groups. The administration has been given two weeks to appeal before the bar goes into effect.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign has continued pushing campaign cash to a Chinese foreign agent, filings reviewed by Fox News Digital show.

The New York Democrat’s campaign paid $442 to Sing Tao Newspapers May 25 for print advertisements, according to her campaign’s records. 

While a small expense, Ocasio-Cortez’s committee appears to be the only one to place advertisements in the paper during the second quarter. Her campaign previously sent $5,000 to the company for the same purpose.

Sing Tao U.S. is a subsidiary of the Hong Kong-based Sing Tao News Corporation Ltd. In August 2021, the Justice Department required the Chinese-owned entity to register as a Chinese foreign agent as tensions rose between Washington and Beijing. 

After the DOJ determined Sing Tao U.S. constituted foreign political activity, Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign dropped nearly $1,500 on advertisements with the company before her most recent payment.

Sing Tao’s United States operations include Chinese language publications in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles. It also has a radio station in Burlingame, California. 

The paper is considered pro-Beijing and receives over half its content from the Chinese company Star Production (Shenzhen) Limited, Axios previously reported.

While Sing Tao U.S. has said it’s free from Chinese Communist Party influence, China’s government maintains one of the ‘world’s most restrictive media environments, relying on censorship to control information in the news, online and on social media,’ the Council on Foreign Relations wrote. 

The Chinese government has cut off media access to its citizens, monitored and suppressed publications and thrown dissident journalists in prison as part of its media control operations. 

Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign did not respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment by press time.

Opponents of offshore wind development in New Jersey are suing the state, as well as Danish energy developer Orsted.The suit claims a tax break granted to the company by state law is illegal, as it only benefits a single entity.‘The Legislature’s giveaway of federal tax credits to Orsted benefits a single company in violation of the New Jersey Constitution,’ said Bruce Afran, a lawyer representing two groups of plaintiffs. ‘In New Jersey, laws that favor a single private party are generally unconstitutional.’

Opponents of offshore wind projects are suing New Jersey and the Danish wind energy developer Orsted over a lucrative tax break the state approved for the company, saying it is illegal because the law was written to benefit only one entity.

The lawsuit was filed Thursday by two residents’ groups that are opposed to offshore wind projects and three electricity customers from Ocean City who seek to overturn the law. They say it gives Orsted about $1 billion in tax relief for one of the two windmill projects it plans to build off the state’s southern coast.

The state Legislature passed a bill allowing Orsted to keep federal tax credits that it was obligated to pass along to ratepayers. In applying for permission to build the project, called Ocean Wind I, Orsted had promised to return such credits to customers.

Lawmakers who narrowly approved the bill said the aid was needed to help Orsted deal with inflation and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

‘If we don’t figure out a solution, this doesn’t get done in New Jersey,’ Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy said after signing the bill on July 6. ‘Either we get this bill done and the industry thrives here, and the jobs that are associated with it, or it goes somewhere else.’

Bruce Afran, a lawyer representing two groups who brought the lawsuit — Protect Our Coast NJ and Defend Brigantine Beach — said the state is not permitted to enact laws that benefit only one party.

‘The Legislature’s giveaway of federal tax credits to Orsted benefits a single company in violation of the New Jersey Constitution,’ he said. ‘In New Jersey, laws that favor a single private party are generally unconstitutional.’

The governor’s office and Orsted both declined comment Friday on the lawsuit, which was filed in state Superior Court in Mercer County.

Almost immediately after the tax break for Orsted was approved, another company that also has approval for an offshore wind project in New Jersey said it, too, wants a tax break.

Atlantic Shores said it wants government assistance to build its own wind farm off the southern New Jersey coast, warning that the project is ‘at risk’ without additional financial assistance from the government.

Murphy said he is ‘open-minded’ toward the Atlantic Shores’ request. Atlantic Shores is a joint partnership between Shell New Energies US LLC and EDF-RE Offshore Development LLC.

In a letter to lawmakers before the bill was approved, a state office representing the interests of utility customers said the bill would boost Orsted’s profits ‘and will result in higher prices being paid by ratepayers.’

<!–>

–>