xAI data center in Southaven, Mississippi (Photo: Christopher Champlain)

An attempt to throw out a lawsuit alleging that xAI violated the Clean Air Act was dismissed by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi.

xAI filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which was brought by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The advocacy group took legal action against the company for the operation of its power plant located at 2875 Stanton Road in Southaven.

In April, the NAACP sued xAI and MZX tech for its methane gas turbine operations, following a 60-day notice of intent to sue. The Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC) and Earthjustice are representing the NAACP.

The tech company claimed its temporary gas turbines were not subject to the Clean Air Act.ย 

The suit includes information from the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) that said they understood the plantโ€™s โ€œcombustion turbinesโ€ to be โ€œmobileโ€ and โ€œportableโ€

MDEQ said โ€œthe referenced turbines are exempt from permitting requirements.โ€

The court  however, found that turbines in question โ€œare not mobile sourcesโ€  by โ€œfederal regulationsโ€ and required air permits. The turbines must also comply with Clean Air Act standards. 

xAI also claimed that citizen suits were unconstitutional, the SELC said. The court dismissed this claim and said the following:

โ€œBecause citizen suit plaintiffs sue on their own behalf, in their own name, and seek penalties that redress harm to themselves, they are not exercising the federal governmentโ€™s executive power.โ€

Kym Meyer, Litigation Director for the SELC, called the ruling a win for all communities including those in South Memphis and North Mississippi. Meyer said they would continue to hold xAI accountable in court.

โ€œThe Clean Air Act promises that communities that have been failed by federal, state, and local leaders have the right to go to court to protect themselves from illegal pollution,โ€™ said Meyer.

 โ€œThis ruling makes it clear that this right cannot be tossed aside simply because a massive corporation finds it inconvenient.โ€

In October the court also blocked an attempt by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss the lawsuit.