DeVillier v. Texas
| Devillier v. Texas | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued January 16, 2024 Decided April 16, 2024 | |
| Full case name | Richard Devillier, et al. v. Texas |
| Docket no. | 22-913 |
| Questions presented | |
| May a person whose property is taken without compensation seek redress under the self-executing Takings Clause even if the legislature has not affirmatively provided them with a cause of action? | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by unanimous |
Devillier v. Texas, (Docket No. 22-913), was a case that the Supreme Court of the United States decided on April 16, 2024.[1][2] The case dealt with the Supreme Court's takings clause jurisprudence. Because the case touched on whether or not the 5th Amendment is self-executing, the case had implications for Trump v. Anderson and whether or not section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is self-executing,[3][4] though ultimately the Anderson decision was announced before Devillier. The Court heard oral argument on January 16, 2024.[1]
Background
In the early 2020s, the Texas Department of Transportation installed certain median barriers in the middle of Interstate 10 in Texas.[5] The barriers fit together tightly such that water could not flow through them. As a result, water accumulated on one side of the highway during Hurricane Harvey and Tropical Storm Imelda, flooding the land on that side.[6][7]
Property owners sued Texas, alleging that the flooding of their land without compensation constituted a taking under the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution and therefore requires compensation.[8]
Texas argues that the Fifth Amendment is not self-executing and because there is no statutory basis for an action against the state, Devillier and other similarly situated landowners cannot be compensated.[9]
Decision
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the unanimous opinion of the court, holding that Devillier should be allowed to pursue his claim through the statutory mechanism articulated under Texas law.[2]
References
- ^ a b "Docket for 22-913". www.supremecourt.gov. Retrieved 2023-09-30.
- ^ a b "Opinion of the Court, Devillier v. Texas" (PDF). Supreme Court of the United States. April 16, 2024.
- ^ Lee, Sean; Yang, Eric (2024-01-11). "Devillier v. Texas". LII / Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 2024-01-19.
- ^ Millhiser, Ian (2024-01-11). "A new Supreme Court case about flooding has weirdly high stakes for Donald Trump". Vox. Retrieved 2024-01-19.
- ^ Begley, Dug (June 8, 2021). "I-10 medians at the center of dispute between flooded landowners and TxDOT set for replacement". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved September 30, 2023.
- ^ Powell, Nick (2021-04-08). "Judge allows Winnie families' lawsuit over Texas highway median to proceed". Houston Chronicle. Retrieved 2023-09-30.
- ^ "Petition for a Writ of Certiorari" (PDF).
- ^ "Devillier Appendix" (PDF).
- ^ "Brief in Opposition to a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari" (PDF).