Trump Administration Unveils Massive Offshore Drilling Expansion

The Esther offshore oil platform, near the California coast at Seal Beach, November 11, 2025. MIKE BLAKE / REUTERS

The Trump administration on Thursday, November 20, unveiled an aggressive plan to authorize oil and gas drilling across millions of square kilometers of U.S. coastal waters, signaling a massive potential expansion of fossil fuel extraction. The move starkly illustrates the growing divergence between the United States, which is boycotting the COP30 climate summit in Brazil, and a global community attempting to mitigate the impacts of climate change.

The proposed five-year plan would open 34 concessions for drilling in the Gulf of Mexico—which President Trump refers to as the “Gulf of America”—as well as off the coast of California and along the pristine northern shores of Alaska, an area previously untouched by drilling. In total, more than 500 million hectares, a landmass roughly the size of the Amazon rainforest, would become accessible to the oil and gas industry. But will energy companies, now facing intense investor pressure for capital discipline and ESG commitments, even have the appetite for such a vast and controversial expansion?

“We are ensuring that America’s offshore industry remains strong, our workers remain employed, and our nation remains energy dominant for decades to come,” declared Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who accused the Biden administration of having “stifled offshore oil and gas leases.” This rhetoric, however, overlooks a crucial nuance: U.S. oil production actually surged to historic highs under President Biden. While the previous administration did place restrictions on *new* drilling, market forces and existing operations drove record output, a testament to the industry’s resilience. This new plan is less about current production and more about locking in fossil fuel infrastructure for the long term.

A Collision Course with Coastal States

Since returning to office, Donald Trump has consistently labeled climate change a “hoax,” methodically dismantling his predecessor’s environmental policies and withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement on climate change. His administration’s single-minded focus on a “drill, drill, drill” strategy was a core campaign promise, but this new plan is set to collide with powerful state and local opposition. How can the federal government’s push for energy dominance be reconciled with the rights of states to protect their own coastlines and economies?

The backlash was immediate and fierce. California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, condemned what he called “Trump’s idiotic plan.” In a statement, he asserted, “This reckless attempt to sell off our coastline to his oil donors is doomed to fail.” California has a long and bitter history with offshore drilling, with new leases effectively banned since the devastating 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill, an event that helped launch the modern American environmental movement. Newsom promised, “We will use every tool at our disposal to protect our coastline.”

The opposition is not purely partisan. Tourist-dependent states along the Gulf of Mexico, still haunted by the catastrophic 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, are also likely to object. The memory of that environmental and economic disaster has created a powerful bipartisan coalition against new drilling. Republican Senator Rick Scott of Florida, for example, has already voiced his opposition on X. Given this potent mix of legal challenges from blue states and economic anxiety from red states, the plan’s path forward is anything but certain. It may ultimately face years of litigation, forcing a significant retreat or leaving it tied up in courts long after its political architects have moved on.