New Englanders pay some of the highest energy costs in the nation, and the Trump administration says the Constitution Pipeline – a project New York successfully blocked once before – is the answer. New York, however, appears to remain stubbornly committed to stopping it. 

The administration announced Monday it’s putting up $42 million to advance the development of the Constitution Pipeline that will, if successfully brought online, transport natural gas from Pennsylvania to New York. 

All five New England states rank in the top 11 states in the country for high electricity rates. And except for New Hampshire, they all have policies that are restrictive or openly hostile to pipeline development, according to an analysis by Always On Energy Research and the Institute for Energy Research. 

New York, which is also among U.S. states with high electricity costs, has been fighting to stop the pipeline project since it was first proposed in 2012. And officials in the state are saying they remain committed to seeing it never happens. 

The administration’s strategy is to declare that pipeline infrastructure development is a national security issue, which may allow it to overcome hurdles from New England states’ anti-pipeline policies that have kept the project from being constructed. 

The opposition to pipelines is also running into an electorate increasingly keen on getting their utility bills to come down. These factors may give the second attempt to build the pipeline a fighting chance. 

Invoking the Defense Production Act

The $42 million in funding for the project falls under the 1950 Defense Production Act, which gives the president broad power to direct industry to prioritize and produce materials deemed essential for national defense, disaster response and energy security.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright said in a statement that the project is part of President Trump’s promise to lower energy costs and to reverse 17 years of “energy subtraction” policies that have driven up prices. 

“Despite America having an abundant supply of low-cost natural gas, tens of millions of Americans have limited access to this reliable energy source due to a lack of pipeline infrastructure,” Wright said. 

The 125-mile pipeline was originally proposed to transport natural gas from Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, to Wright, New York – about 30 miles west of Albany – where it could connect with other existing and new pipeline systems to transport gas throughout the five New England states. 

Federal regulators approved the project in 2014, but New York rejected it in 2016. A federal court upheld the rejection the following year. 

The Clean Water Act gives a state one year to act on a proposed project, but New York took two years and eight months to decide. In 2019, federal regulators ruled that New York had waited too long to make its decision. In 2020, Constitution Pipeline Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Williams Company, gave up on the project, and in 2021 a federal court erased the approvals. 

The company initiated the project again in 2025, and New York sued in 2026 to stop it. As New York stomped on this pipeline, the U.S. built about 8,100 miles of pipelines, according to the U.S. Oil and Gas Association. 

Wright told Fox News that the administration wants to see construction begin in spring next year and be completed in two years. 

Limited support from leadership

Despite the potential to bring down energy costs, New York Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul remains firmly opposed to the project. Ken Lovett, Hochul’s senior communications adviser on energy and the environment, said in a statement that the project is a ploy by the administration to draw attention away from the impact of the war in Iran on energy prices. 

“While the President continues to obsess over blocking renewable energy projects in order to focus on gas, oil and even coal, Governor Hochul is focused on driving an all-of-the-above energy strategy designed to keep the lights on and costs down for New Yorkers,” he said. 

Wright stated in the Fox interview that the administration had hoped to have the pipeline online by the winter of 2027, but Hochul remains a hurdle preventing the pipeline from getting approvals. He said the administration is in talks with her and believes she’ll get on board with the project after the midterm elections. 

It’s unclear how much support the pipeline will get from the leadership of other New England states, but Wright said the other states are on board. 

New Hampshire GOP Gov. Kelly Ayotte said Monday she supports the project to increase gas supplies to New Hampshire, WMUR reported. 

In June, E&E News reported that Democratic Govs. Ned Lamont, of Connecticut, Maura Healey, of Massachusetts, and Dan McKee, of Rhode Island, publicly expressed more support for natural gas pipelines, but they weren’t endorsing any specific projects. Many expressed skepticism that Healey would ever get behind the pipeline. 

In 2025, Healey bragged about killing two pipeline projects in her state. Her attitudes may have shifted somewhat since then as voters express more concern about high energy costs. 

She signed an executive order in March that directs the state to support development of 10 gigawatts of solar and energy-use reductions. The order also calls for a review of how a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal and other fuel storage assets may contribute to meeting energy supply and reliability needs in the region. 

But the pressure to lower costs as midterms approach is mounting. Earlier this month, she asked the administration to expedite its review of a pipeline project that involves installing wider pipes along sections of the Algonquin natural gas pipeline, which brings gas from New Jersey through southern New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island and into Massachusetts.

Healey stated in a letter to Wright it would lower costs for 600,000 consumers by reducing the need for imported LNG. How much she’ll apply that reasoning to the Constitution Pipeline remains to be seen. 

Opposition gearing up

State-level permitting for the pipeline ultimately rests with New York. There’s a bipartisan demand to lower energy costs, but influential climate groups, such as EarthJustice, the NRDC, and Food & Water Watch, will likely line up to block it again as they had in the past. 

New York state regulators in February were submitting filings with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to oppose the project, which was before the administration invoked the Defense Production Act to get it moving forward. 

Meanwhile, besides building pipelines from Pennsylvania, the Trump administration is seeking ways to circumnavigate the anti-fossil fuel interests that critics argue are keeping prices in New England high. 

Lacking natural gas supplies, many homes in the region rely on heating oil during the winter. The administration announced this week it is drawing on emergency reserves of heating oil reserves to help ensure supply and lower costs. 

“This is a temporary measure to solve a temporary supply disruption,” Wright said in a statement. 

For longer-term solutions to New England residents’ high energy costs, the Trump administration is looking at natural gas infrastructure. Unless it can get New York on board, the effort to build the Constitution Pipeline could be a repeat of the first attempt.