Skip to content
TrackPodcasts
governmentJan 16, 20241:11:55pending

[22-913] Devillier v. Texas

About this episode

Devillier v. Texas

Wikipedia · Justia · Docket · oyez.org

Argued on Jan 16, 2024.

Petitioner: Richard Devillier.
Respondent: State of Texas.

Advocates:

  • Robert J. McNamara (for the Petitioners)
  • Aaron L. Nielson (for the Respondent)
  • Edwin S. Kneedler (for the United States, as amicus curiae, supporting Respondent)

Facts of the case (from oyez.org)

Petitioners Devillier and others own property in Texas along Interstate Highway 10 (IH-10). The State of Texas, through the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), elevated IH-10 and installed a solid concrete median barrier, which acted as a “weir” to obstruct natural water flow and led to the flooding of the petitioners’ properties. Despite being aware of the potential for flooding, the State proceeded with the construction and even extended the barrier, causing extensive damage to the petitioners’ properties.

The petitioners sued the state, directly invoking the Taking Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which they argued applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. The district court denied Texas’s motion to dismiss, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated, finding the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause as applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment does not provide a right of action for takings claims against the state.

Question

May a party sue a state directly under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment?

Get every episode summarized

Each time Supreme Court Oral Arguments publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.

Email me new episodes

Free for 3 shows. No card needed.

Hosts & guests

No transcript yet

This episode has not been transcribed. Request it and it moves to the front of the queue.

[22-913] Devillier v. Texas

Supreme Court Oral Arguments

0:00
1:11:55

More episodes

More from Supreme Court Oral Arguments

View all episodes →