Learning How to Oppose: Organizational Collaboration

There are a few types of opposition organizations: local grassroots groups that form in response to data center projects, established environmental NGOs at the state level, and established environmental NGOs at the regional and national level. These organizations learn strategy in at least three distinct ways.

How opposition spreads.

1. Within-state diffusion: Local state actors learn what is possible by observing neighboring regions. Aurora City Council in Illinois recently passed a 180-day moratorium on data centers, then quickly rolled out a set of stringent regulations requiring third-party noise studies, water reports, energy audits, 1,500-foot setbacks for generators, and on-site renewable energy. It is likely that surrounding municipalities in Illinois are drawing insights from Aurora's moratorium-to-regulation pathway.

2. Regional NGO transmission: When local organizations connect to regional nonprofits, they learn strategies that span multiple states. Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), for example, applies similar strategies across different states. In the Carolinas, SELC's main tactic has been to file multi-claim zoning lawsuits with local co-plaintiffs. They are currently suing Colleton County, South Carolina, where a proposed 1,000 MW data center borders the ACE Basin, a 1.7-million-acre protected watershed. Their claims include multiple layers: that the county violated its own zoning code through a "special exception" clause; that the county failed to publicly disclose information; and that the rezoning conflicts with the comprehensive plan.

SELC is selecting similar cases in states with similar regulations. Their ACE Basin case appears designed to establish precedent — that a county cannot create a zoning "special exception" conflicting with its own comprehensive plan — which they can then carry into Alabama, Tennessee, and other states with similar agricultural rezoning dynamics.

3. Cross-state coalition exchange: In April 2026, mobilizers in Texas convened a two-day event, Data Center Rebellion. Attendees were not limited to Texas: a handful of Arizona organizers also attended. It is likely we will soon see similar mobilization strategies appearing in Arizona. In another case, the San Marcos, TX zoning denial win became a model that organizers in other states studied and began replicating.

Three coordination tiers.

• Tier 1 — Locally Driven (17 states): Grassroots groups retain private attorneys, pursue procedural legal theories (inadequate notice, spot zoning). Moratoriums preferred over litigation.
• Tier 2 — Mixed Local + National (16 states): State-level organizations (MCEA in Minnesota, MEA in Wisconsin, NMELC in New Mexico) are the legal engines. Earthjustice provides targeted interventions. Local grassroots groups achieve independent wins.
• Tier 3 — Dominant National NGO (5 states + cross-border): SELC anchors the Southeast (NC, SC, GA rate case, TN/MS). Earthjustice anchors MT, LA, and targeted cases in 9 states. This tier has the highest win rate.

Why vertical collaboration matters.

Opposition organizations at different levels benefit when they collaborate vertically. Local and grassroots organizations gain legal expertise for complex claims (utility rate, environmental permitting) from regional and national NGOs. National NGOs gain local co-plaintiffs who lend community standing and legitimacy. Most collaborations occur within states, not between them — and this applies especially for movements that are more established and connected to an institutional actor.

Collaboration rates vary sharply by state.

This maps neatly onto the legal strategy coordination tiers above, showing how vertical collaboration (local ↔ national) and horizontal connections (state ↔ state) reinforce each other. States where opposition is most successful tend to be those where all three levels are actively connected.