A lawsuit accusing SpaceX's artificial intelligence division of violating federal air pollution law will move forward after a Mississippi judge rejected the company's request to dismiss it. The decision, detailed in an opinion released late Friday, allows the NAACP to pursue its claims over gas-fired combustion turbines used to supply electricity to massive AI data centers in Greater Memphis.
The Southern Environmental Law Center and Earthjustice brought the case on the NAACP's behalf in April 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi. Their lawsuit alleges that xAI and its subsidiary, MZX Tech, installed and operated 27 gas turbines in Southaven, Mississippi, between August and December 2025 without obtaining an air permit.
The AI business is owned and operated by SpaceX, the aerospace and defense technology conglomerate led by CEO Elon Musk. SpaceX has rebranded the division as SpaceXAI or SpaceXSI. Its Colossus data centers, along with a power plant the division is building in Southaven, have drawn community opposition for years.
According to the lawsuit, emissions from the turbines include pollutants that contribute to smog and particulate matter that can raise health risks. The complaint also identifies unpleasant odors among the unwanted effects of the equipment and alleges that the companies operated without regard for the health and safety of nearby residents.
In a dismissal motion filed in June, lawyers for SpaceXAI argued that the turbines qualified as mobile equipment and therefore did not require permits. They also challenged the NAACP's right to bring the case under the federal Clean Air Act and argued that lawsuits brought by community groups under the law were unconstitutional.
The judge rejected each of those arguments. The opinion found that the plaintiffs had statutory standing under the Clean Air Act and that the combustion turbines did not qualify as mobile sources under Mississippi's state implementation plan. It also concluded that the law's citizen suit provision violated neither Article II of the Constitution nor the private nondelegation doctrine, allowing the claims to proceed.
The ruling followed another unsuccessful effort to end the litigation. About two weeks earlier, the same court had rejected a Department of Justice request to terminate the case against Musk's company. SpaceX did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
