

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
“This is really setting a precedent,” said one activist. "This is something that other communities can look to."
The nationwide backlash against the artificial intelligence industry entered a new stage on Tuesday after a small Wisconsin city overwhelmingly passed a first-of-its-kind referendum limiting AI data center construction.
According to a Wednesday report in Politico, voters in the Milwaukee suburb of Port Washington, home to roughly 12,000 residents, supported the data center restrictions by a margin of around 2-to-1.
The referendus requires town officials to seek voter permission before approving or providing tax incentives for any future data centers in the community, giving residents veto power over new projects.
Port Washington is already home to a $15 billion, 1.3-gigawatt data center funded by tech giants Oracle and OpenAI, and local residents wanted to ensure that no additional facilities are green lit without their express approval.
The referendum was pushed by a grassroots community organization called Great Lakes Neighbors United, which advocates "advancing transparency, environmental stewardship, and responsible development in Wisconsin."
Christine Le Jeune, founder of Great Lakes Neighbors United, told Politico that she hopes the work done limiting AI facilities' construction can be replicated nationwide.
“This is really setting a precedent,” Le Jeune, said. "This is something that other communities can look to."
Politico noted that similar anti-data center measures are coming up for votes later this year in communities across the US, including in Monterey Park, California; Augusta Township, Michigan; and Janesville, Wisconsin.
Opposition to AI data centers has become a major political issue in recent months, as local residents have objected to the large facilities consuming massive amounts of electricity and water, while also generating significant noise pollution.
Data centers also put a major strain on the US electrical grid, causing a spike in utility bills across the country. PJM Interconnection, the largest US grid operator that serves over 65 million people across 13 states, projected earlier this year that it will be a full six gigawatts short of its reliability requirements in 2027 thanks to the demands of data centers.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) introduced a bill in March that would impose a nationwide moratorium on AI data center construction “until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment.”
At the same time, the AI industry is planning on spending big money in 2026 to influence elections, with the goal of passing legislation setting a single set of AI regulations that will take effect throughout the US, overriding any restrictions placed on the technology by state governments.
CNN reported in February that Leading the Future—a super political action committee (PAC) backed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz and Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, is pledging to spend at least $100 million to ensure AI-friendly candidates get elected to Congress this year.
“Wisconsin showed the entire nation that we believe that the people should be at the center of government and the priority of our judiciary, not the billionaires," said newly elected Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Chris Taylor.
Liberals on the Wisconsin Supreme Court strengthened their majority on Tuesday when Democratic-backed candidate Chris Taylor romped to victory over her conservative opponent by more than 20 percentage points.
With the win, liberals hold a 5-2 majority on what's been described as "one of the most important courts in America" and are guaranteed control through at least 2030.
As reported by the Associated Press, Taylor centered her campaign on protecting reproductive freedoms, which have come under threat across the country after the US Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.
In her victory speech, Taylor also spoke out against billionaires using their vast wealth to buy influence in politics.
“Once again, Wisconsin showed the entire nation that we believe that the people should be at the center of government and the priority of our judiciary," said Taylor, "not the billionaires, not the most powerful and privileged, but the people."
In addition to protecting access to reproductive care, Taylor's win also gives liberals a bulwark to stand against any efforts by President Donald Trump and his allies to suppress voting in future elections.
As Bolts staffer writer Alex Burness explained in a post-election analysis, the Wisconsin Supreme Court "may soon be asked to weigh in on congressional redistricting... and could see any number of lawsuits during the coming midterms and 2028 presidential election, as it did in 2020."
Burness pointed to an interview Taylor gave to Bolts in February in which she emphasized her determination to protect voting rights, saying that "we cannot be fatigued when it comes to democracy... it's just something we have to keep working on."
Progressive research and communications organization A Better Wisconsin celebrated Taylor's win as "a major victory for democracy, reproductive freedom, and the constitutional rights of all Wisconsinites."
Melinda Brennan, executive director of ACLU Wisconsin, said Taylor's win showed "resounding support for protecting abortion access and defending voting rights in our state."
Ben Wikler, former chairman of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, said Taylor's victory was a tribute to Wisconsin progressives who have not stopped fighting after Trump's 2024 victory.
Wikler added that the result is further evidence that "the overall environment is toxic for anyone aligned with Trump."
"We must prevent this federal power grab and protect our democracy from these corrupt partisan stunts," said the ACLU of Wisconsin legal director.
Residents of Wisconsin and Washington, DC this week continued the legal fight against efforts by President Donald Trump's administration to gain access to confidential information about registered voters as the Democratic National Committee issued a related warning to 10 state governments.
The group Common Cause on Thursday highlighted its recent motion to intervene in United States v. Evans, a federal lawsuit brought by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) against the District of Columbia's Board of Elections, led by Monica Evans.
Lawyers from the ACLU National Voting Rights Project filed the motion in the US District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of Common Cause and two DC voters, Ruth Goldman and Chris Melody Fields, in late December.
As the filing notes, the Trump administration wants to obtain personal details about adults in DC and all 50 states "to build an unauthorized national voter database and to target voters for potential challenges and disenfranchisement."
The Republican administration has sued nearly half of US states plus DC in a bid to get their voter information.
"Handing over voter data without any parameters or protections in place is a huge violation of privacy and invites exactly the kind of errors that have historically led to eligible voters being wrongly purged or denied their right to vote."
Ethan Herenstein, staff attorney with the ACLU project, explained in a statement that "federal law does not authorize the Department of Justice to demand sweeping access to voters' most sensitive personal information."
"Handing over voter data without any parameters or protections in place is a huge violation of privacy and invites exactly the kind of errors that have historically led to eligible voters being wrongly purged or denied their right to vote," Herenstein warned.
Maryam Jazini Dorcheh, senior director of litigation at Common Cause, said that "voters in DC, and all voters, rightly expect the government to keep their personal information secure and only use it for its intended purpose of maintaining accurate records."
"We are committed to defending voters' rights and privacy in Washington, DC and nationwide, and this case is one of many where we are stepping in to ensure those protections are upheld," she continued.
The Trump administration's attempt to build a national voter database could be the catalyst for disenfranchising voters nationwide and putting our private data at risk.We're taking legal action to defend the states rightfully refusing to cooperate with the U.S. Justice Department's scheme.
[image or embed]
— ACLU (@aclu.org) January 6, 2026 at 11:29 AM
Demonstrating that commitment, Common Cause and the ACLU also partnered with attorneys from Law Forward and three Wisconsin voters—Melissa Adams, Amanda Makulec, and Jaime Riefer—on Thursday to file a motion to intervene in a similar suit the administration launched against the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC), which has refused to hand over vote data.
"If provided this data, the Justice Department could easily manipulate the data to spread disinformation about voting and attempt to baselessly target eligible voters and remove them from the rolls," said Ryan Cox, legal director at the ACLU of Wisconsin. "We've seen this play out in numerous other states, and there is no reason to believe that this administration wouldn't weaponize Wisconsinites' private data toward those same ends. We must prevent this federal power grab and protect our democracy from these corrupt partisan stunts."
Eric Neff, the acting chief of the DOJ's Voting Section, said in federal court last month that Arkansas, Indiana, Kansas, and Wyoming—which all have Republican secretaries of state—have "complied voluntarily" with the department's data demand. He also said that several other states "have expressed with us a willingness to comply" based on an agreement called a memorandum of understanding (MOU) "that we have sent them." The DNC issued warnings to 10 of those states on Friday.
Daniel Freeman, the DNC's litigation director, sent letters to election leaders Alabama, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, and Utah "to address an imminent violation of the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA)," pointing to Neff's comments about the MOU.
Specifically, the letter warns that the MOU's 45-day removal demand "has the potential to violate two provisions of the NVRA: the notice and waiting provision governing removal based on a suspected change in residence... and the quiet period provision barring systematic voter list maintenance in the months before a federal election."
"This letter does not constitute written notice of violations of the NVRA," Freeman noted. "Rather, the DNC sends this letter in the hope that the imminent violations set out above may still be avoided. Nonetheless, the DNC stands ready to issue a formal notice should evidence of ongoing violations come to light."
In a Friday statement, DNC Chair Ken Martin accused Trump and US Attorney General Pam Bondi of a "big government power grab" aimed at gathering "sensitive personal information like driver's license numbers, Social Security numbers, and party affiliation, opening the door to privacy concerns and further political retribution."
"The DNC won't stand idly by as the Trump DOJ tries to get access to voters' sensitive information and put eligible voters at risk of being wrongfully purged from voter rolls, which is why we are calling on secretaries of state and election officials across the country to stand up for voters and reject the Trump administration's illegal agreement," he said. "To be clear: Democrats stand ready to fight back and defend voters, and we're prepared to use the tools at our disposal to do so."
Some state officials have already publicly responded. Nebraska Secretary of State Bob Evnen accused the DNC of "grandstanding" and said that he has no plans to sign an MOU but will send the state's registration list next month "unless barred by a court order," while a spokesperson for the Texas Secretary of State's Office told Votebeat and the Texas Tribune that the state sent its voter roll last month.
Others have been tight-lipped. The office of Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson—who gave the administration a public statewide voter registration list last year—told Deseret News on Friday that she doesn't have anything additional to add at this time. Mississippi Today reported that Secretary of State Michael Watson's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
TJ Lundeen, a spokeperson for the South Carolina Election Commission, told the Post and Courier that the agency's legal team is reviewing the DNC's letter. Lunden added that any deal with the DOJ will be presented and voted on during a public meeting.
Meanwhile, a DOJ spokesperson told Axios, which reported on the DNC letters, that "organizations should think twice before interfering in a federal investigation and encouraging the obstruction of justice, unless they'd like to join the dozens of states that are learning their lesson in federal court."
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson also weighed in, telling the outlet that "the Civil Rights Act, National Voting Rights Act, and Help America Vote Act all give the Department of Justice full authority to ensure states comply with federal election laws, which mandate accurate state voter rolls."
"President Trump is committed to ensuring that Americans have full confidence in the administration of elections, and that includes totally accurate and up-to-date voter rolls free of errors and unlawfully registered noncitizen voters," she added of the Republican leader who notably tried to cling to power after losing the 2020 presidential election.
The current fight over voter data dates back to Trump's controversial March executive order on US elections. In October, DC-based District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly permanently blocked the part that required proof of US citizenship on federal voter registration forms. The ACLU was also involved in that legal battle. Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the group's Voting Rights Project, welcomed the ruling as a "clear victory for our democracy."