Governors Flex Executive Power on Mining and Data Centers
In a notable show of executive authority, two Democratic governors this week signed sweeping executive orders addressing contentious land-use and infrastructure battles in their states. On Tuesday, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz issued an order to block new nonferrous mineral mining near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, while Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro signed a measure imposing strict guardrails on data center development. Both orders respond to pressures from federal policy changes and speculative private projects, underscoring how states are increasingly stepping in where federal and market forces leave gaps.
Walz’s Executive Order 26-10 directs the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and the Pollution Control Agency to halt all new environmental reviews, permitting, and leasing for nonferrous mining in the Rainy River Headwaters Watershed (RRHW). The move comes after Congress voted to overturn a 20-year federal mining ban that had protected the region from copper-nickel extraction. The order also requires the DNR to review existing state mineral leases for compliance and to decline participation as a cooperating agency in any federal environmental review for such projects while litigation remains unresolved.
In Pennsylvania, Shapiro signed Executive Order 2026-05, which imposes Responsible Infrastructure Development (GRID) Requirements on all data center proposals. The measure directs state agencies to require developers to demonstrate firm financing, access to electricity, and agreements with tech companies before they can obtain permits. Shapiro said the order targets “predatory” speculators who he claims are “bullying” local officials and attempting to sue their way into building projects. He noted that of more than 100 data center proposals under discussion, only five have secured permits, and none are yet operating AI data centers.
Context: Federal Rollback and Speculative Surge Fuel State Action
The Minnesota order is a direct response to a shift in federal policy. Congress’s removal of the 20-year mining ban reopened the door to companies like Twin Metals, which had proposed an underground copper-nickel mine near Ely, just outside the Boundary Waters. Environmental groups and local advocates have long warned that sulfide mining could contaminate the pristine waters of the Boundary Waters and the Kawishiwi River, threatening a $1 billion outdoor recreation economy. Walz framed the order as protecting “a national treasure” and ensuring that “outfitters, small businesses, and communities that depend on it continue to thrive for generations to come.”
The litigation referenced in the order, Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness v. DNR, is pending and challenges earlier state decisions on mining leases. By halting permitting until that case is resolved, Walz aims to prevent irreversible damage while the courts weigh in. The order does not ban mining outright but effectively freezes new projects in the watershed, a temporary but significant barrier for any future development.
In Pennsylvania, the backdrop is a speculative boom. Since Shapiro announced two major data center projects last summer—in Luzerne and Bucks counties—promising thousands of jobs and $20 billion in investment, the number of proposals has surged. Many lack basic details, and some face fierce local opposition. A recent University of Pennsylvania poll found that 61% of Americans now oppose new data center construction, a sharp jump from just months earlier. Shapiro, who is running for reelection and has been mentioned as a potential 2028 presidential contender, has shifted from touting the economic benefits of data centers to cracking down on what he calls irresponsible developers. His order also strengthens local control by requiring compliance with community standards and public input.
Perspective: Executive Orders as a Tool for State-Level Policy Battles
These executive orders highlight a growing trend of governors using their authority to shape policy in areas where federal action is either absent or contested. In Minnesota, Walz is stepping into a vacuum created by Congress, using state powers to protect natural resources despite federal rollback. In Pennsylvania, Shapiro is addressing a market failure, where speculative projects threaten to inflate energy costs and disrupt communities. Both orders rely on state agencies to enforce new standards, reflecting a broader shift toward state-level environmental and economic regulation.
The timing is also politically significant. Walz, rumored to be a potential vice-presidential pick, is courting environmental voters. Shapiro, facing a tough reelection bid, is responding to grassroots opposition to data centers, a issue that has united Democrats and Republicans. The orders demonstrate that executive action can be a practical tool for governors seeking to respond quickly to urgent issues without waiting for legislative action.
However, these orders are likely to face legal challenges. Mining proponents argue that Minnesota’s order oversteps state authority and harms economic development. Data center developers in Pennsylvania may sue, claiming the new requirements are arbitrary and violate due process. The outcome of these battles will set precedents for how far states can go in regulating land use and infrastructure. As the Neutrogena boycott shows, public pressure can force corporate change, but state action is often a more direct lever. Similarly, the deportation controversy demonstrates how executive orders at the federal level can spark backlash, but these state orders may face less resistance if they align with local sentiment.
For now, the immediate impact is clear: Minnesota has halted new mining permits, and Pennsylvania has raised the bar for data centers. Whether these measures survive legal scrutiny will shape the future of environmental protection and AI infrastructure development across the country. As the nation watches, these governors are betting that executive power can effectively address the complex challenges of the 21st century.
Comments