Photograph by Samuel Ramirez / Stills
words by miranda green
It was back in 2022 when I first learned about the Constitution Pipeline. I was an editor at the time, working with a pugnacious freelance reporter on an astroturfing story she dug up.
The piece was about a group called Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future whose focus, according to its Facebook Ads (and internal documents the reporter discovered), was to convince younger, liberal, and—central to their campaign—non-white audiences that gas is a “clean” energy solution.
“If we replace coal with renewables partnered with natural gas,” a Black actor in a white lab coat says in one digital advertisement, “(the result will be) reliable, affordable energy for all Americans.”
The reporter found that the group was backed by the Williams Companies, an Oklahoma-based energy company contending at the time with yet another setback in its attempts to build the natural gas Constitution Pipeline from Pennsylvania to New York.
After years of regulatory delays and pushback from protesters, the company canceled and withdrew the pipeline project in 2020. The tug-of-war over reviving the project resurfaced this week, when the Trump administration announced the use of a law typically reserved for wartime efforts to force the pipeline’s construction.
Today, Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future has a public-facing website and boasts several former politicians as advocates. Williams no longer needs to garner support through shady advertisements, because it has the president of the United States in its corner.
Trump first indicated an interest in reinstating the pipeline less than a month into his second term. His Department of Energy on Monday announced the use of the 1950 Defense Production Act to make Williams’ 125-mile pipeline a reality. The $42 million price tag is to come from the defense budget.
“For too long, families and businesses in New York and other blue states have paid the price for anti-energy policies that kneecap production, block critical infrastructure, and drive up costs,” Interior Sec. Doug Burgum said in a statement. “President Trump is reversing that failed approach, choosing abundance over government-imposed scarcity.”
The Trump administration also leveraged the Korean War-era law to keep open coal plants and coal mines slated for retirement, despite the fact that the energy they produce is more expensive than alternatives.
This past April, Trump signed five executive orders on the same day invoking the law to speed up fossil fuel production, including the production of petroleum, coal, and liquefied natural gas.
The timing is key here. As I wrote in last week’s newsletter, the Trump administration is scrambling ahead of the midterms to squeeze every drop of gas available to ease the burden at the pump (and look good in the polls)—so much so that it’s turning to Russia for help.
The latest move will highly favor pipeline company Williams, though construction of the pipeline would take years and any benefits won’t be reaped anytime soon.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s responses to the pipeline have vacillated.
When Trump began pushing in 2025 to move ahead with the pipeline, the White House said that Hochul “caved” and agreed to approve it along with one other as part of a negotiation to save New York’s proposed offshore Empire Wind development. Environmentalists blasted the news, calling it a quid pro quo. One climate watchdog group said of the deal: “In a normal era, this would be a Watergate-level scandal.”
But Hochul rejected the White House’s characterization, saying she made no deal. The Empire Wind project is now over 60% complete, and construction resumed after a federal judge granted a preliminary injunction in January.
Then in August 2025, 130 New York elected officials penned a letter urging Hochul to reject the pipeline project, whose proceedings were still being continued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and environmental groups in May filed a lawsuit against FERC challenging its decision to continue proceedings on the pipeline, despite Williams’ vow to abandon it in 2020.
The state of New York’s main opposition to the pipeline hinges on water quality. In its January opposition filing with FERC, New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation said Williams was attempting to “bypass critical environmental reviews and undercut New York State’s regulatory authority.”
“While the President continues to obsess over blocking renewable energy projects in order to focus on gas, oil, and even coal, Gov. Hochul is focused on driving an all-of-the-above energy strategy designed to keep the lights on and costs down for New Yorkers,” Ken Lovett, Hochul’s senior communications adviser on energy and environment, said in a statement.
New York locals also protested the news.
Just a few weeks ago, Newsweek ran an opinion piece titled: “How Democrats Can Rein in the High Cost of Energy.” It was penned by two former congressional Democrats, Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio and Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu. In the piece, the duo wrote:
“Let’s show voters that we can shield them from the high prices stemming from the president’s ill-advised forays overseas and embrace an all‑of‑the‑above energy strategy to help lower costs.”
They added: “We can achieve this balancing act by pairing clean energy investments, efficiency and weatherization upgrades, and our nation’s unparalleled natural gas infrastructure to help families see real savings at the end of every month.”
The two signed the op-ed with their new titles, co-chairs of Natural Allies for a Clean Energy Future.
Join our membership community. Support our work, receive a complimentary subscription to Atmos Magazine, and more.
How a Failed Pipeline Found a Powerful New Ally
