In the first quarter of 2026, grassroots organizations halted 75 data center projects valued at $130 billion.

      TL;DR

      The number of anti-data center groups surged to 833 across 49 U.S. states, disrupting 75 projects valued at $130 billion in the first quarter of 2026, matching the total for all of 2025 within just three months.

      Grassroots resistance to data center construction in the U.S. has become significant enough to influence where and if the AI sector can operate. According to a new report from Data Center Watch, a monitoring service by AI research firm 10a Labs, activists successfully blocked or postponed at least 75 projects totaling $130 billion in the first quarter of 2026. NBC News noted that this marks the highest number of disruptions reported in a three-month timeframe since tracking began in 2023.

      This trend signifies a fundamental change rather than a temporary increase. The number and value of disrupted projects in Q1 closely mirrored the total for the entire year of 2025. The count of active anti-data center groups more than doubled from 396 at the close of 2025 to 833 by March, with the highest concentrations in Maryland, Ohio, and Texas.

      The opposition spans across political lines and is driven by local concerns. Communities are rallying around issues such as electricity costs, water usage, and noise pollution. These issues have already led Denmark to halt all new grid connections for data centers and caused the EU to encourage households to reduce peak electricity consumption due to the strain AI data centers place on the grid.

      Legislative efforts are gaining momentum alongside this grassroots movement. Data Center Watch reported 14 statewide measures introduced in Q1 2026, and analysis by MultiState identified moratorium bills in 11 states, with proposed pauses ranging from three months to four years. Over 300 bills related to data centers were introduced in state legislatures within the first six weeks of the year.

      Although no statewide moratoriums have been enacted yet, progress is being made. Maine’s legislature approved a moratorium in April intended to pause permitting for facilities that consume 20 megawatts or more, making it the first of its kind nationally. Governor Janet Mills vetoed it but indicated she would have signed it if a specific local project in Jay, Maine, had been exempted, and separately enacted a law that disallows data centers from receiving state tax incentives.

      A poll by Heatmap Pro found that a majority of Americans would “strongly” oppose a data center near their homes, contrasting with a survey from nine months prior that showed more divided opinions. Gallup data indicates that 70% are opposed, reflecting a rapid shift in public sentiment as the issue transitions from local planning conflicts to broader political implications.

      The data center industry appears to believe opposition will not persist, as U.S. utilities are set to invest $1.4 trillion by 2030 in grid infrastructure largely driven by data center demand, while capital expenditures for hyperscalers are expected to exceed $690 billion in 2026 alone. The disparity between industry construction goals and community acceptance is growing more quickly than anticipated by both sides.

      In some instances, local opposition is forming even before official project proposals are submitted. According to the report, just the rumor of a new data center can spur organized resistance. This proactive organizing complicates siting decisions, even in states without formal moratoriums, as local permitting authorities face political pressure prior to any applications being received.

      The Atlantic published a contrary viewpoint recently, arguing that the backlash against data centers is exaggerated and that they can deliver genuine economic advantages to host communities. The article recognized the political benefits of opposing data centers but contended that it doesn’t always translate into sound policy. The success of this viewpoint may depend on whether the industry can showcase real local benefits beyond mere tax revenue, which many communities have yet to experience.

      The report suggests an industry that believed it could navigate local opposition through financial means and rapid construction, contrasted with a country that is increasingly opposing such assumptions on a case-by-case basis.