La Junta asks Supreme Court to toss lawsuits seeking to cancel LUMA contract
The Fiscal Board filed Tuesday to intervene as amicus curiae in cases CT-2025-0006 and CT-2025-0007, arguing the government has no valid grounds to end the deal.
The Fiscal Supervisory Board asked the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico to dismiss the pending lawsuits seeking to cancel the LUMA Energy transmission and distribution contract, entering the dispute directly on Tuesday.[1]
La Junta filed a request to intervene as amicus curiae in the consolidated cases CT-2025-0006 and CT-2025-0007.[2] In its brief, the board argued the Government of Puerto Rico does not have valid legal grounds to terminate the grid operation contract under the reasons it cited.[3] The board stated plainly that the government cannot legally end the contract on those grounds.[4]
The court, for its part, limited the paperwork. It ruled that no further unsolicited written filings will be accepted in the consolidated LUMA cases unless the court explicitly asks for them.[5] On the LUMA documents retained in the file, the court said it had made no determination on their merits, legal value, or implications.[6]
Josué Colón Ortiz, executive director of the AAPP and Energy Czar, said the Tuesday ruling keeping LUMA's documents in the file does not mean the court accepted LUMA's arguments.[7] The amicus filing now puts the board on record against cancellation before the justices weigh the merits.[8]La Junta de Supervisión Fiscal pidió al Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico desestimar las demandas pendientes que buscan cancelar el contrato de transmisión y distribución de LUMA Energy, al entrar directamente en la disputa el martes.[1]
La Junta radicó una solicitud para intervenir como amicus curiae en los casos consolidados CT-2025-0006 y CT-2025-0007.[2] En su alegato, la Junta argumentó que el Gobierno de Puerto Rico no tiene fundamentos legales válidos para terminar el contrato de operación de la red bajo las razones que citó.[3] La Junta expresó llanamente que el gobierno no puede terminar legalmente el contrato por esos fundamentos.[4]
El tribunal, por su parte, limitó la documentación. Resolvió que no se aceptarán más radicaciones escritas no solicitadas en los casos consolidados de LUMA, a menos que el tribunal las pida de manera explícita.[5] Sobre los documentos de LUMA retenidos en el expediente, el tribunal dijo que no había hecho determinación alguna sobre sus méritos, valor legal o implicaciones.[6]
Josué Colón Ortiz, director ejecutivo de la AAPP y Zar de Energía, dijo que la resolución del martes que mantiene los documentos de LUMA en el expediente no significa que el tribunal aceptó los argumentos de LUMA.[7] La radicación como amicus coloca ahora a la Junta en récord en contra de la cancelación antes de que los jueces evalúen los méritos.[8]
Proof8 sources · 5 publishers · signed
What this stands on
The Puerto Rico Fiscal Supervisory Board requested the Supreme Court dismiss pending lawsuits seeking cancellation of the LUMA Energy contract. · El Nuevo DíaPuerto Rico
The Puerto Rico Fiscal Supervisory Board filed a request on Tuesday with the Puerto Rico Supreme Court to intervene as amicus curiae in the LUMA Energy contract cases CT-2025-0006 and CT-2025-0007. · esnoticiapr.com
The Fiscal Supervisory Board argued the Government of Puerto Rico does not have valid legal grounds to terminate the LUMA Energy power transmission and distribution operation contract. · esnoticiapr.com
The Supreme Court of Puerto Rico ruled that no additional unsolicited written filings will be accepted in the consolidated LUMA Energy legal cases, unless explicitly requested by the court. · Prensa Abierta
The Puerto Rico Supreme Court explicitly stated in its ruling that it had not made any determination on the merits, legal value, or implications of the documents submitted by LUMA Energy. · Metro Puerto RicoPuerto Rico
Josué Colón Ortiz, executive director of Puerto Rico's AAPP and Energy Czar, stated that the Supreme Court's Tuesday ruling retaining LUMA Energy documents in the case file does not mean the court accepted LUMA's arguments. · Metro Puerto RicoPuerto Rico
The 3 we could place publish from Puerto Rico. 2 could not be placed by their address. None is an official body: that part stands on reporting, not on the underlying document or transcript.