Devillier v. Texas

Questions presented

SCOTUS records, cert granted 29 Sep 2023

In First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los Angeles, this Court recognized that the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause was "self-executing" and that "[s]tatutory recognition was not necessary" for claims for just compensation because they "are grounded in the Constitution itself[.]" 482 U.S. 304, 315 (1987). Since First English, several state courts of last resort have held that the self-executing nature of the Takings Clause requires them to entertain claims directly under the Clause without the need for statutory authorization. Two federal Circuits, the Fifth and the Ninth, disagree and have held that claims for just compensation are only available if they are legislatively authorized. The question presented is: 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?

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The US Supreme Court case involved a dispute between landowners and the state of Texas regarding property rights and compensation. The plaintiffs, led by Devillier, argued that their properties were unlawfully taken or damaged due to actions by the state without just compensation, violating the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause. Specifically, they contended that flooding caused by government-managed water control projects resulted in significant damage to their lands. The court examined whether these actions constituted a compensable taking under federal law. Ultimately, the decision reaffirmed principles surrounding eminent domain and clarified when governmental-induced flooding could be considered a taking requiring compensation.