This article is exclusively
for Heatmap Plus subscribers.
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.

Sign In or Create an Account.
By continuing, you agree to the Terms of Service and acknowledge our Privacy Policy
Welcome to Heatmap
Thank you for registering with Heatmap. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our lives, a force reshaping our economy, our politics, and our culture. We hope to be your trusted, friendly, and insightful guide to that transformation. Please enjoy your free articles. You can check your profile here .
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Subscribe to get unlimited Access
Hey, you are out of free articles but you are only a few clicks away from full access. Subscribe below and take advantage of our introductory offer.
subscribe to get Unlimited access
Offer for a Heatmap News Unlimited Access subscription; please note that your subscription will renew automatically unless you cancel prior to renewal. Cancellation takes effect at the end of your current billing period. We will let you know in advance of any price changes. Taxes may apply. Offer terms are subject to change.
Create Your Account
Please Enter Your Password
Forgot your password?
Please enter the email address you use for your account so we can send you a link to reset your password:
Though the issue already dominates U.S. politics, policymaking has lagged behind.

Data centers are swallowing American politics. But on the policy front, states are only in the infant stages of regulating them.
After reviewing legislative responses in the top five states for data center fights – Virginia, Pennsylvania, Texas, Georgia and Indiana – I found the seeds of new rules around sales taxes for computer equipment, project siting, energy and water usage, non-disclosure agreements and grid upgrade costs. But it’s unclear how much can actually be accomplished in any one direction – development restrictions, environmental protections, or tax revenue – in many of these places without changes in political control and approaches to governance.
At the same time, the need for action is only growing more urgent. Polling clearly shows that Americans dislike data centers, especially when they serve artificial intelligence. Thanks to the twin political pressures of inflation and energy prices, this is fast becoming one of the key issues dominating state policymaking.
“This has moved from the world of energy wonks to political crisis,” Costa Samaras, director of the Scott Institute for Energy Innovation at Carnegie Mellon University, told me. Samaras, a former senior policy adviser to the Biden White House, thinks we’re still just at the “first stage” of policymaking at the state level, driven largely by elected leaders’ fear of being dinged at the ballot box should electricity bills continue to rise. “Issues like these can escape containment from one subsector to being a governor’s problem. And it is now a governor’s problem.”
If you ask representatives of the data center sector, they’ll certainly agree that policymakers are in fight-or-flight mode. “There’s a tendency for policies to be reactive in much more of a heavy-handed, negative, we-need-to-stop type of respect,” Dan Diorio, vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, told me Thursday evening in an interview.
Some smaller states like Maine are considering blanket moratoria that would clamp a lid on halt industry growth. But those are the exceptions at the moment. That’s much less likely to happen in a place like Virginia, the industry’s No. 1 destination for new development, which is also the top state for data center conflicts according to Heatmap Pro data. The Commonwealth is almost certainly the furthest ahead on regulating data centers, but is also far from enacting any blanket restrictions.
The three big issues where Virginia lawmakers have focused their attention are site restrictions, water use requirements, and changes to the state’s largest tax exemption for data centers. On siting and water policy, state legislators are moving forward with changes that industry sees as amenable and reached through consensus, Diorio told me. For example, on Tuesday, the state legislature sent a bill to Governor Abigail Spanberger’s desk that would set up a new “high use energy facility” permitting program. If enacted, this special process would provide for data center-centric conflicts to be resolved through a site assessment process, with an eye toward noise and proximity to schools or residential homes. Alongside that bill was another requiring data centers to publicly disclose water use, a nod to calls from activists for greater transparency around H2O consumption.
Beyond those bills, though, the big kahuna in Virginia is the state’s ginormous sales tax exemption for most data centers. The tech sector credits this exemption for the industry’s major growth in the state, as it allows developers to write off computer equipment if they create at least 50 new jobs. An increasing number of lawmakers, however, argue that the tax break costs more than it’s bringing in, both in revenues and in employment gains. The state Senate leadership wants to scale back or scrap the exemption entirely in the state’s next budget, though members of the House have pushed back in response to opposition from the electrical trades.
In Pennsylvania, the No. 2 spot for data center conflicts, there’s a bit more tension on the horizon. State House Democrats shepherded legislation in late March to set up a comprehensive regulatory program that would compel data center companies to cover energy infrastructure upgrade costs, reduce their power usage when there’s higher strain on the grid, and pair any increase in incremental electricity demand with new solar, wind or battery storage. Opposition from industry groups, including the Data Center Coalition, has made legislators skittish, however. The bill now sits in the state Senate, where it has yet to be scheduled for a hearing.
Like Pennsylvania, Georgia is a politically-purple state where significant reform seems unlikely. The state legislature adjourned Friday with lawmakers opting not to advance a bill ending a large tax break for data center computer equipment, and a separate bill banning non-disclosure agreements couldn’t get out of a single committee.
Both states are struggling to resolve the disparate concerns held by cliques of lawmakers, from big business Republicans to moderate Democrats to stalwart anti-data center politicians of either party. In both states, it’s likely that policy – and populist angst – will register most quickly at the local level, at least through the remainder of the year, while broader statewide changes ride on outcomes in the 2026 election, as Pennsylvania and Georgia will each vote on control of the governor’s mansion.
The gubernatorial agenda is a bit of a mystery in both states at the moment, however. Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro – a rumored 2028 presidential contender – has claimed in recent weeks that he’ll advance an executive-level suite best practices for data center development called GRID, or the Governor’s Responsible Infrastructure Development standards, though he has not yet disclosed how they will be implemented other than to say they’ll be requisites for accessing faster permitting timelines at the state level. His office did not respond to a request for comment on the matter. But a broad-stroke description of the standards states they’ll force data center developers to “bring their own power generation online or fully fund new generation to meet their needs – without driving up costs.” The standards will purportedly also mandate some sort of “transparency and community engagement,” a nod to the rampant conflict over non-disclosure agreements playing out in pockets across the Keystone State.
Meanwhile, in Georgia, leading Republican candidate Brad Raffensberger has said only that he’ll make data center companies pay more for power they use.
The other two states in the top five – Texas and Indiana – are solidly under Republican control and, for the most part, stable politically. Of the two, Texas is further ahead of the curve; last year, the state passed a bill teeing up new large load interconnection standards that will soon come into effect for facilities using 75 megawatts of power or more. Many of these standards exist to ensure that projects attached to the grid are actually bankable by requiring companies to provide ERCOT with details on siting, permitting and energy use. In March, the Texas Republican Party, which has long been ideologically pro-business, adopted a resolution requesting that state agencies require independent assessments of data center projects and create “planning and regulatory standards” on their water use, potentially by mandating “water-efficient cooling technologies.”
In Indiana meanwhile, the likeliest outcome is no progress towards anything particular. While there is pressure from the grassroots to act on something, the legislative conversation is mostly focused on siting and taxes, with elected leaders split on whether to prioritize streamlining permitting for energy and tech infrastructure or scrapping the sales tax exemption for data centers to plug holes in the state budget. “Its hard to predict whether this different dynamic we’re in right now is going to change things at the state level, shake up major elections, or be confined to local fights,” Indiana environmental activist Ben Inskeep of Citizens Action Coalition told me.
Where this leaves us is holding a grab bag, waiting on the results of elections that may or may not provide any additional clarity. Data centers have become the watchword for politicians trying to invoke the pain of inflation, so they’ll certainly be a factor in campaigns. But where actual policy will go is anybody’s guess and could remain mired in factional tug-of-wars.
“Some folks are trying to attack it from the data center side. Some folks are trying to attack it from the supply side. Some folks are doing both,” Samaras told me. “It’s because inflation is still a high concern for people. They’re focused on prices.”
Log in
To continue reading, log in to your account.
Create a Free Account
To unlock more free articles, please create a free account.
A new front opens in the data center wars.
A series of lawsuits filed in federal court asks a big question – are data center moratoria constitutional?
In early August, data center developer DC Blox sued the city of Nashville in federal court to overturn a zoning moratorium stopping them from building a hyperscale facility adjacent to the city zoo. “The Data Center Moratorium, moreover, is a targeted attack against DC BLOX, in violation of federal constitutional protections,” the suit argued, claiming that it defied the corporation’s due process and equal protection rights.
Around the same time, another developer – Wixom Industrial One – filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Wixom, Michigan, to try and “invalidate the city’s illegal police power moratorium” blocking their data center.
These two cases were far from novel or the first of their kind, and they’re now a fresh front in the battle over hyperscale data centers. At least that’s what some who work on these cases say: In April, attorneys with the law firm Vorys published a “client alert” asserting “many moratoria may be vulnerable to statutory, procedural, and constitutional challenges.” The attorneys advised that constitutional arguments against moratoria “may be stronger where a government singles out data centers without a sound factual basis, treats similar land uses differently without a reasonable basis, or adopts a restriction driven more by political pressure than by defensible planning or regulatory objectives.”
Months later, according to court documents, the Vorys attorneys who authored the alert now represent real estate firm Thor Equities in a federal case against the Ohio city of Urbana, arguing the city’s decision to reject their data center project broke “fundamental protections” under the U.S. Constitution. (Vorys and Thor Equities did not respond to requests for comment.)
It’s unclear how many of these kinds of cases have been filed to date. Data on federal court cases is quite opaque. But legal experts and industry attorneys tell me we should expect them to be on the rise as developers seek whatever tools they can find to get projects built.
“Bringing a lawsuit like this is fairly cheap, something they can do at a relatively low cost, and imposes a real cost on local governments to defend themselves,” said Daniel Metzger, director of the Cities Climate Law Initiative at Columbia Law School’s Sabin Center. “The cases out there will be bellwethers. And if successful, there’ll be a lot more of them.”
What developers probably want looks a lot like Hill County, Texas, where an LLC proposing an $80 million data center project was stymied in May by the state’s first countywide moratorium. (It predated Governor Greg Abbott’s temporary freeze of data center development in Texas by three months.) Within a period of only a few weeks, the LLC sued and the county rescinded the pause on approvals. The case was dropped a month later. Local reports state the county had to afterwards pay the corporation $100,000 in legal fees – a drop in the bucket compared to what a drawn-out court battle would have cost the rural county.
Metzger said whether the companies will win these cases is ultimately not the point – their goal is to win a finished data center, not a judicial ruling. By filing expansive litigation in the national court system, a hypothetical developer can exhaust the coffers of a city or county with legal expenses that are chump change compared to would-be billions in private financing for compute infrastructure.
“These lawsuits may deter some local governments from taking steps to oppose data center development, just because of the cost it would impose on them to defend a lawsuit, even if they know they have a strong legal basis for the action they want to take.”
Those I spoke to in private practice about data center developers’ constitutional arguments agreed with Metzger’s assessment that it’s too early to tell whether the companies will win. Generally, they said, a city or county will win this kind of case if it demonstrates a rational basis for its decision-making and courts typically want to defer to governmental autonomy. The onus will be on the developers to prove a moratorium was meritless – that’s the due process challenge – or unfairly targeted their industry in a way other sectors don’t face, which is the basis of the equal protection claim.
“What they’re saying is in essence that these actions the municipality is taking are arbitrary and capricious, which is one of the sort of catch-all standards,” Thomas Allen, a partner at K&L Gates, told me. “They say the laws lack a rational basis. And then they make equal protection claims, saying data centers are being singled out because of political concerns as opposed to actual things relevant to the legislature’s directive. They’re not basing their decisions on the underlying merits of the project but reacting to political pressure.”
“It’s a reliance question and it’s about the treatment of their projects,” added Laura Morton, an attorney with Ashurst Perkins Coie. “It’s always been important to talk about and engage with communities where your infrastructure is planned. Here, I think this is the developers going in, maybe having conversations, and then suddenly they’re getting a reversal after already receiving these approvals and making investments based off of what the conversations and rules were.”
The likelihood of these constitutional challenges reaching higher courts anytime soon is quite low. It’ll be a long time before we see one of these cases reach a verdict, let alone some kind of appeals process come to fruition. Nevertheless, the new legal ambiguity around these local restrictions is an important new facet of the data center wars, including for developers.
“Companies want to act within the law to get [things] done, so whatever tactics they can do to help get the project over the line that are legal and ethical, they may try those,” Allen told me. “And if that includes the pressure of a lawsuit, that’s a judgment they’ll have to make.”
And more on this week’s conflicts around project development.
1. Montgomery County, Pennsylvania – We reached a new normal in the data center backlash, and it all seems to have started in King of Prussia.
2. Columbia County, Wisconsin – The gubernatorial race in this state is transforming local fights over wind projects into must-watch popcorn fodder for anyone obsessed with the state of the energy transition, or national politics for that matter.
3. Shelby County, Alabama – One quick update on the intervention of John Rich, the country star turned Trump’s “special envoy for American landowners,” in an Alabama Power transmission project: it’s getting a lot more elected officials involved.
4. New Jersey – We try to conclude every Hotspots on a positive note. So this week’s silver lining comes to you from the Garden State, where state regulators have approved more than a dozen agrivoltaics projects.
A conversation with Ella Nilsen — formerly of CNN, now with Echo Communications — about where we stand in the fight over the energy transition.
This week’s conversation is with Ella Nilsen, who recently left CNN as a climate reporter and is now a new vice president at energy and cleantech PR firm Echo Communications. Having worked on Capitol Hill alongside Nilsen, I knew her to be an exceptional reporter who asked hard questions of those in power on all sides. So when I found out she was taking her journalism hat off and putting the comms cap on, I wanted to do something you rarely get to do with one of your reporting peers: ask for her own opinion about where we stand in the fight over the energy transition.
Our chat was lightly edited for clarity.
What’s it like going from CNN and climate journalism to advising on communications in the energy sector, especially when it comes to clean tech in this fraught moment?
So before I covered climate and clean energy, I was a political reporter who covered campaign cycles and Capitol Hill for a while, and I was always interested in the nexus of politics and politics. I tried to make as much of my coverage about that. Politics is policy, and the other way around.
Being on the other side of it is, well, I know from my experience as a reporter what interests them. I’m trying to figure out ways to make sure when I’m bugging you all that the pitch lands, because hopefully it’ll be something people are interested in. Things are changing so fast. It’s a really fascinating time to be a reporter and be in the clean energy comms space.
Okay, but now that you’re in clean energy comms, how do you handicap the fight over developing these technologies? Who is winning, who is losing, and why?
I think it’s tough to call exact winners and losers right now because over the last few months, there have been so many new and interesting developments.
Look at the Invest in Tomorrow Coalition, which has been getting involved in Republican primaries for Freedom Caucus members. There’s been this perception for a long time that the clean energy industry didn’t fare well in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act fight. They had important wins while losing pretty key stuff. But there’s been this interesting reckoning within the industry, and even this last summer, where people are moving the ball forward in interesting ways. They’re trying to get involved in political fights with direct results.
What messages do these primaries send? On the one hand I can see there being political consequences but also, now, more solar energy money going into Republican politics has the anti-renewable folks saying they need to go harder at them. I’m curious how you see the energy fight landscape changing in light of these election results.
I think it shows the industry has some fight in it. What the Coalition would probably say is, they want to be lethal and this is political warfare. They’re trying to be taken seriously.
There is sort of this two-pronged strategy happening right now. Obviously Invest in Tomorrow has gotten a lot of press attention for their track record. There’s also within the industry an attempt to shape a public narrative around wind, solar, battery storage to combat misinformation, both through conventional media and social media. They’re happening in tandem and it's a reflection of the results.
How is the backlash over data center development affecting the work you’re now doing?
Well, I’m still early, but I think the data center question is a fascinating one. Conversations around policy and where we go from here really seem to me to be happening in the state realm. Not a lot of policy happening at the federal level. There’s New York State’s data center pause, which is leading to lawmakers trying to get more leverage.
It’s in the backdrop, where projects are being announced with massive power plants to supply new data center demand, and at the same time there’s a conversation around virtual power plants, DERs. Another phrase emerging for it is “community power.”
It’s starting to be a fascinating conversation around community benefits. There are tax benefits when a data center comes to town but when it comes to energy use, what can communities actually leverage out of this? I know former Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm has been arguing for strong community benefit agreements, getting big tech companies to pay for solar and EVs and then using all of that to create a virtual power plant. Getting that to be flexible for data centers. That’s only one part of the pie but it’s fascinating to have this conversation about what forms of energy we need for all this demand happening.
What do you foresee about the impact of the backlash, given that land use, visuals, air, and water – its all being swept up in the same conversation?
I don’t have a crystal ball and have the same questions.
It’s all happening so quickly and it’s all playing out in so many different states. There are really important questions here and there are people smarter than I am on this, talking about how we meet this demand in the short term and long term or whether this is an opportunity for getting clean energy onto the grid. But it’s a delicate dance.