How We Rallied a Big Coalition to Stop a Shady Data Center Bill

The tech industry is applying its old manifesto to data center facilities: Move fast and break things – but do it quietly.

The industry, and its allies in the Trump administration, are turning to sneaky legislative tactics to shield data centers from complying with environmental laws.

Last week, a low-profile Republican lawmaker quietly submitted a bill to a committee that isn’t known for handling environmental legislation.

The bill, called the “Protect American AI Act,” would have exempted data centers from complying with bedrock environmental laws, while severely limiting the public’s ability to take them to court. The bill seemed designed to stave off a successful tool for challenging unchecked data center pollution: civil lawsuits.

Earthjustice, however, is very familiar with industry sneak attacks.

We got wind of the bill and sprang into action. Within 24 hours, Earthjustice policy advocates mobilized over 100 organizations to oppose the bill and shed light on its problematic components to the House Judiciary Committee.

The next day, the bill was shelved.

This congressional win demonstrates broad support for the principle that data centers should not get special carve-outs from laws that protect communities. The race to build new data centers must not come at the cost of people’s right to clean air and water or access to justice in the courts.

Earthjustice is working hard on behalf of our clients around the U.S., at the state and federal levels, to ensure that data centers disclose and mitigate their impacts, pick up the electricity tab, and are powered by clean energy.

‘Thief in the night’

On a recent morning, Brielle Green, senior legislative council at Earthjustice, received a message from the House Judiciary Committee, a group better known for dramatic impeachment hearings and investigating corrupt big business. A congressional newcomer, Rep. Michael Baumgartner of eastern Washington, had submitted a bill called the “Protect American AI Act.”

Under the bill, a data center or facility that meets the vague definition of “covered infrastructure” could proceed without a proper environmental review under the required statutes.

The bill dramatically limits any legal challenges to a faulty review by:

• taking away remedies in a way that could allow polluters to ignore environmental review issues;
• slashing the amount of time that communities have to challenge a data center’s permits to 90 days – even though data centers frequently use non-disclosure agreements and shell companies to keep communities in the dark; and
• limiting the types of courts that are allowed to hear these cases.

Essentially, it was an industry wish list of environmental deregulation. And, it had an unusually fast track to committee markup: two days.

“The energy was ‘thief in the night,’” says Green. “It was the speed and committee of choice. They know most enviro groups don’t have dedicated eyes on judicial processes.”

Luckily, Earthjustice does. Green immediately started sounding the alarm.

Over the next few hours, Earthjustice’s policy team produced an organizational sign-on letter that brought together groups in opposition to the bill. Our researchers put together expert analyses of the hidden costs of data centers, like the fact that 40% are sited in areas of high water stress yet can require significant water to function.

Driven by data center growth, the U.S. now leads the world in new methane gas power plants under development, bringing more harmful emissions to communities. One study projected the annual public health burden of U.S. data centers could reach $20 billion in 2028.

Senior legislative counsels Stephen Schima and Julian Gonzalez, foreground, are part of Earthjustice’s Policy and Legislation department in Washington, D.C. (Melissa Lyttle for Earthjustice)

The word gets out

In less than 24 hours, more than 130 organizations signed on to the letter. The range of signers reflected the crosscutting impact of the rapid growth of data centers on our society, from environmental groups to advocates for civil justice, consumer protection, AI transparency, and local groups in Washington state.

Word of the bill’s growing opposition spread to other political spaces as the letter circulated. Even the Republican Party was divided on the bill: Politico reported that Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) wrote on social media that he planned to vote against the bill “because no industry deserves special treatment under the law.”

One day after learning of the bill, Earthjustice submitted the opposition letter to the House Judiciary Committee. A hearing to discuss the bill was expected the next day, and Democratic lawmakers like Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal were prepared to speak in opposition to the AI bill.

But then, hours after we submitted our letter, the committee pulled the bill.

“In practice, this is an open door to violating the law and getting away with it,” says Green. “The law means nothing more than the paper it’s on if you cannot enforce it.”