Judge halts remand of cases against LUMA to local courts pending appeal.

La Fortaleza Chief of Staff Francisco Domenech Fernández

By THE STAR STAFF

U.S. District Judge Laura Taylor Swain issued an order Thursday temporarily halting the transfer of lawsuits against grid operator LUMA Energy to the Puerto Rico court. The ruling responds to “Urgent Motions” filed by the private consortium, which requested a stay of the remand pending its appeals.

The order affects an earlier ruling by Swain in lawsuits filed by the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority, the Public-Private Partnerships Authority, and Gov. Jenniffer González Colón, all seeking to cancel LUMA’s supplemental contract to operate the energy utility’s transmission and distribution system. 

La Fortaleza Chief of Staff Francisco Domenech Fernández said he expected LUMA to appeal to the First Circuit after Swain’s decision to return the contract-cancellation cases to state court.

“We are not surprised,” Domenech told reporters. “Obviously, LUMA is determined not to provide the people of Puerto Rico with good service while continuing to raise our electricity costs.”

Domenech said the González Colón administration filed a motion on Wednesday with the Puerto Rico Supreme Court asking it to note Swain’s decision and resume the cases.

He added that the justice secretary filed informational motions so the Supreme Court can reassume jurisdiction and review the cases on their merits.

Domenech added that the government will continue the process in commonwealth court to seek the cancellation of LUMA’s contract.

He said the González Colón administration will keep fighting, and that’s why yesterday’s Supreme Court motion was filed -- to keep the case moving forward at the state level.

On Law 82 of 2026, meanwhile, which changes permit challenge processes, Domenech argued the law aims to prevent work stoppages based on unsubstantiated claims. The law will require individuals challenging proposed projects to post a 10% deposit based on the cost of the project.  

“I believe the position is simple: mere frivolous allegations cannot be used to halt construction or projects,” Domenech said. “The law aims to prevent frivolous allegations or attempts to cancel these permits.”

The official said the bill allows individuals or communities to challenge a permit at the agency level without posting a bond.

“If you first file an appeal with the agency, which is where everything begins, as I understand the bill, a bond isn’t required,” Domenech said. “So, you can start the appeal process.”

He maintained that the bond would apply when a party is unsuccessful with the agency and decides to go to court.

“It’s when the agency makes a determination against that appeal, and you want to go to court -- that’s why I was talking about courts -- and you want to go to court, that’s when the bond is required,” he said.

The official denied that the measure is intended to benefit developers and stated that it seeks a balance between the right to appeal and the economic impact of halting a project.

“I wouldn’t categorize it as benefiting developers; it’s about striking a balance,” he said.

“This has nothing to do with the substance of the project,” Domenech added. “This is about how we expedite permits and remove obstacles to project stoppages.”