Which states are pausing or banning data centers in 2026?

How states and Congress are regulating data center construction: moratoriums, siting limits, and ratepayer protections

At least 15 states have introduced or advanced bills to pause, restrict, or impose conditions on new data center construction since 2025, with one governor's executive order and one legislature's vetoed bill marking the most concrete actions to date. In parallel, at least 735 Senate LDA filings from 228 distinct clients named 'data center' in their specific-issue text between 2025 Q1 and 2026 Q2, with the quarterly filing count rising from 66 in 2025 Q1 to 206 in 2026 Q2.

At a glance

States with moratorium bills, 2025–2026
At least 15 states introduced or advanced bills
Idaho signed bill, 2026
H 895 signed April 2, 2026 water use limits
Maine legislature vote, April 2026
Moratorium bill passed legislature, vetoed by governor
New York executive order, July 2026
Hochul signed one-year hyperscale moratorium July 14, 2026
LDA filings, 2025 Q1
66 filings naming 'data center'

Federal bills, lobbying clients, and the coalition record

The federal legislative record on data center siting and ratepayer protection is almost entirely at the committee stage. The Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act (H.R. 9442, sponsor Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY-14) has 18 cosponsors and a Senate companion S. 4214 (Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT); both were referred to committee in 2026 and remain there. The Power for the People Act of 2026 (H.R. 8241, Rep. Paul Tonko, D-NY-20) has 27 cosponsors and a Senate companion S. 3682 (Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-MD, 8 cosponsors); both are in committee. The Reverse Big Ugly Tax Breaks for Data Centers Act (H.R. 10448, Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet, D-MI-8) leads the cosponsor count at 29, referred to Ways and Means as of September 16, 2026. The Ratepayer Protection Act (H.R. 9340) is in committee and appears in 28 Senate LDA filings from 27 distinct clients — the broadest client base of any single bill named in data-center filings. H.R. 9777 (Protecting Ratepayers Act, Rep. Byron Donalds, R-FL-19) and S. 3852 (GRID Act, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-MO) are the principal Republican-sponsored entries, both in committee. All 25 bills identified in the federal landscape are at the committee stage; none has passed either chamber. The party breakdown among sponsors is 18 Democratic, 6 Republican, and 1 Independent. The House Energy and Commerce Committee holds referrals for at least 17 of the 25 bills, making it the central chokepoint for this issue set.

On the lobbying side, CORNERSTONE GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, INC. leads outside firms with 14 filings across 3 clients (AMPERE COMPUTING LLC, RIOT PLATFORMS, INC., and VANTAGE DATA CENTERS MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC) per Senate LDA records. BALLARD PARTNERS filed 13 times for 3 clients including EQUINIX, INC. and EDGECONNEX, INC. Among clients, EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE leads with 16 filings using both in-house and outside firms, followed by EQUINIX, INC. at 14 filings. LDA filings do not disclose which side of any bill a client is on.

State bills introduced in 2025–2026: moratoriums, siting limits, and water restrictions

The official state bill record shows at least 15 states with legislation specifically targeting data center construction, siting, or utility impacts in the 2025–2026 cycle. The statuses below are drawn directly from the Open States record as of late September 2026.

Moratorium bills (introduced, in committee, or failed): Minnesota HF 4888 (introduced April 9, 2026, sponsor Finke) would establish a new data center moratorium and require a Public Utility Commission report; its Senate companion is SF 4298. Michigan SB 1018 (introduced June 4, 2026, sponsor Jim Runestad) would impose a moratorium on approvals for new data centers; referred to the Committee on Government Operations. Vermont S 205 (introduced January 6, 2026, sponsor Rebecca White) proposes a temporary moratorium on AI data centers; referred to the Committee on Finance. South Carolina H 5286 (introduced February 26, 2026, sponsor Long), titled 'Data Center Moratorium,' is introduced. Maryland HB 120 (introduced 2026, latest action February 23, 2026) proposes a moratorium on construction of new data centers with co-location and generation contingency conditions. Oklahoma SB 1488 (introduced 2026, latest action April 14, 2026) would establish a Corporation Commission moratorium and require a study. Missouri HB 3369 (introduced 2026, latest action May 15, 2026) would prohibit permit issuance for data center construction in St. Louis for one year. Wisconsin SB 1061 (session 2025) has failed as of April 6, 2026. Kansas SB 531 (session 2025–2026) has also failed as of April 10, 2026.

Siting and construction limits: Virginia HB 1515 (sponsor Irene Shin, introduced January 23, 2026, continued from last session as of July 21, 2026) would require local approval and impose a temporary moratorium. Georgia HB 1012 (introduced 2026, latest action February 19, 2026) would prohibit local government construction or development of new data centers for a specified time. Ohio HB 710 (introduced February 24, 2026, sponsor Steve Demetriou) would prohibit public support and limit construction of new data centers; referred to committee February 25, 2026.

Water and utility restrictions: Idaho H 895 (session 2026) is signed as of April 2, 2026, establishing limitations on consumptive water use for cooling data centers — the only restrictive data-center bill confirmed signed into law in this cycle from the official record. California AB 93 (session 2025–2026), addressing water resources at data centers, was vetoed as of January 22, 2026. New York S 10642 (introduced 2025–2026), the 'Responsible Data Center Development Act,' is introduced as of June 4, 2026.

Executive actions: the Maine veto and the New York executive order

Two of the most significant actions in this cycle did not come from bill enactments but from a governor's veto and a governor's executive order, both confirmed by official government sources.

Maine: The Maine Legislature passed a bill (reported as LD 307 in news coverage) that would have imposed a moratorium on data centers larger than 20 megawatts until November 2027, making it the first statewide legislative passage of such a measure in the country. Governor Janet Mills subsequently vetoed the bill, as confirmed by McGuireWoods and MultiState (May 2026). The Open States record does not show a current Maine bill with a 'signed' or 'enacted' status for a data-center moratorium, consistent with the veto. The Maine legislature's passage and the governor's veto are confirmed by news sources; the bill's final status in the official record is vetoed.

New York: Governor Kathy Hochul signed an executive order on July 14, 2026, establishing a one-year moratorium on new hyperscale data centers while the state develops regulatory standards, as confirmed by the official Governor's press release and Reuters. This executive order is distinct from the legislative bill S 10642, which remains introduced in the legislature. The executive order is not a statute and does not appear in the state bill record; it is cited here from the official government source.

These two actions illustrate the range of tools available to state executives: a veto to block legislative action and an executive order to act without waiting for the legislature.

Federal lobbying on data centers: quarterly filing counts and top clients, 2025–2026

Senate LDA filings whose specific-issue text mentions 'data center' totaled at least 735 distinct filings from 228 clients and 208 registrants between 2025 Q1 and 2026 Q2 (2026 Q3 data is incomplete as of the filing deadline). The quarterly count by period: 66 filings in 2025 Q1, 79 in 2025 Q2, 100 in 2025 Q3, 122 in 2025 Q4, 156 in 2026 Q1, and 206 in 2026 Q2. The 2026 Q3 figure of 6 is incomplete and should not be compared to prior quarters.

The top clients by filing count (2025–2026 combined) are: EDISON ELECTRIC INSTITUTE (16 filings, in-house and outside firms, latest filing); EQUINIX, INC. (14 filings, latest); IRON MOUNTAIN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT, LLC (12 filings, outside firm only, latest); DIGITAL REALTY TRUST, INC. (10 filings, latest); COREWEAVE, INC. (9 filings, latest); DATA CENTER COALITION (8 filings, latest); ORACLE CORPORATION (8 filings, latest); and PORTLAND GENERAL ELECTRIC (8 filings, latest). AMAZON WEB SERVICES filed 6 times through outside firm MINDSET ADVOCACY, LLC (latest). The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE also filed in 2026 Q2 naming 'Artificial Intelligence, Data Centers' under the Clean Air and Water issue code (filing). LDA filings do not disclose which side of any issue a client is on; filing counts are a measure of engagement, not position.

Federal bills named in data-center lobbying filings

Of the 735 matching filings, 279 named at least one specific bill, covering at least 586 distinct bill citations. The bills named most frequently in filings are energy and grid reliability measures rather than data-center-specific legislation, reflecting the overlap between data center power demand and broader grid policy.

The most-cited bills by filing count are: H.R. 1047 (Guaranteeing Reliability through the Interconnection of Dispatchable Power Act, 83 filings, 21 clients); H.R. 3616 (Reliable Power Act, 72 filings, 18 clients); H.R. 3632 (Power Plant Reliability Act of 2025, 66 filings, 15 clients); H.R. 3638 (Electric Supply Chain Act, 63 filings, 13 clients); and H.R. 3062 (Promoting Cross-border Energy Infrastructure Act, 58 filings, 13 clients). All five are in committee in the 119th Congress.

The Ratepayer Protection Act H.R. 9340 appears in 28 filings from 27 clients — the broadest client base of any single bill in the data-center filing set — per a 2026 Q2 filing by AI SUPPLY CHAIN ALLIANCE that also names H.R. 9332, H.R. 9339, H.R. 9335, H.R. 6633, H.R. 6529, and the 'Protecting Families from AI Data Center Energy Costs Act' in the same specific-issue text. H.R. 4776 (SPEED Act, 40 filings, 20 clients) and H.R. 6633 (High-Capacity Grid Act, 32 filings, 21 clients) round out the most-cited ratepayer and grid-access bills. H.R. 1 (One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Public Law 119-21, enacted July 4, 2025) is cited in 43 filings from 18 clients; those filings name it alongside data-center issues, but the LDA record does not specify which provisions of the enacted law those clients were engaged on.

The federal preemption dimension and the state-federal tension

A distinct thread in the federal record is the question of whether Congress will preempt state data-center regulation. News coverage from Center for American Progress Action confirms that the House version of H.R. 1 contained a provision that would have prevented state and local governments from imposing AI-related moratoriums; that provision was not confirmed in the enacted text by any official-record tool result, so no claim is made here about what the final Public Law 119-21 says on this point. A separate December 11, 2025 executive order from President Trump directed federal agencies to challenge 'onerous and excessive' state AI regulations, as reported by Akin Gump and Governing.

On the congressional side, H.R. 10119 (Protecting Local Control of Data Centers Act, Rep. Tom Barrett, R-MI-7, 4 cosponsors, referred to Energy and Commerce August 20, 2026) takes the opposite approach, seeking to preserve local government authority. H.Res. 1471 (Rep. Ro Khanna, D-CA-17, referred to Judiciary and Energy and Commerce August 3, 2026) expresses the sense of the House that communities impacted by data center construction should have transparency and local autonomy rights. Both are in committee. The tension between federal permitting acceleration and state/local restriction authority is the central unresolved question in this policy space, and the official record shows no enacted federal statute that has resolved it as of September 29, 2026.

Sources

  1. H.R. 9340 - Ratepayer Protection Act (Congress.gov)
  2. Senate LDA records (Senate LDA)
  3. MN HF 4888 - New data center moratorium established, and Public Utility Commission required to submit a report. (MN Legislature)
  4. MI SB 1018 - Businesses: other; moratorium on certain approvals for and operation of any new data centers; provide for. Creates new act. TIE BAR WITH: SB 1019'26 (MI Legislature)
  5. VT S 205 - An act relating to a temporary moratorium on AI data centers and a report on the construction and operation of AI data centers in Vermont (VT Legislature)
  6. VT S 205 - As Introduced (VT Legislature)
  7. SC H 5286 - Data Center Moratorium (SC Legislature)
  8. HB 120 (mgaleg.maryland.gov)
  9. SB 1488 (oklegislature.gov)
  10. HB 3369 (documents.house.mo.gov)
  11. SB 1061 (docs.legis.wisconsin.gov)
  12. SB 531 (kslegislature.gov)
  13. VA HB 1515 - Local approval of data centers; temporary moratorium. (VA Legislature)
  14. HB 1012 (legis.ga.gov)
  15. OH HB 710 - Prohibit public support, limit construction of, new data centers (OH Legislature)
  16. H 895 (legislature.idaho.gov)
  17. AB 93 (leginfo.legislature.ca.gov)
  18. S 10642 (assembly.state.ny.us)
  19. Maine’s Near-Miss on Data Center Moratorium Is Wake-Up Call to Industry (McGuireWoods)
  20. State Data Center Moratorium & Ballot Measure Trends 2026 (MultiState)

Related questions

  • Which federal bills on data center ratepayer protection have the most bipartisan cosponsors, and what are their prospects in committee?
  • How does Idaho's signed water-use restriction for data centers compare to the bills still pending in other western states?
  • Which lobbying clients named both the Ratepayer Protection Act and grid reliability bills in the same LDA filing, and what does that pattern suggest about their priorities?
  • What happened to the AI preemption provision in the House version of H.R. 1, and does the enacted Public Law 119-21 contain any data-center-specific language?
  • Which state moratorium bills have companion bills in both chambers, and which are single-chamber introductions with no cross-chamber support?