Texas Flooded Rancher's Land, Supreme Court To Hear Case in 2024
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 дек 2023
- The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of a Texas farmer who is seeking compensation from the state after the construction of a concrete barrier along a highway caused several devastating floods on his property.
The case presents a simple yet vital question of constitutional law: When the Constitution says government must pay “just compensation” when it takes private property, does it mean what it says?
Read more about Richie's Supreme Court case here: ij.org/case/devillier-cert-pe...
The Institute for Justice represents all of our clients for free! Learn how you can support our work here: ij.org/devillier
I am so sorry for you all. Hard to believe that the "Free State of Texas" is not as free as we think it is! Corruption is rampant everywhere!! Give these evil tyrants no rest!
Texas is listed as the "least free" state in the union
Vote them out.
One of the problems you get into is that this is the Federal Interstate Highway System. Yes the state did the work, but it was for a federally funded road. It comes down to future liability. In order for Texas to continue to receive funding to maintain the Interstate system they have to make the mandated improvements. What they don't want to have happen is to be on the hook financially when those updates cause problems. The Texas position is Fed road, Fed problem. Had this been a state highway then Texas would be on the hook.
I retired in Texas about an hour outside Austin after being assigned here by the Army.
Texas is a highly overrated state with very high property tax, expensive housing, high electricity cost, droughts with water use restrictions and the exploding population.
Business are moving here because the state government aggressively promotes itself and build legislation that encourages companies to move here. But this has lead to population growth that outruns the ability of infrastructure, housing and schools ability to meet. And don’t forget the uncontrolled vast migration at the border and I think you have a state that will soon see these business growth trends slowly start to reverse, and over the coming decades, leave Texas with a high debt load that will become an unsustainable burden on those remaining tax payers.
Weird how 300 year floods are suddenly happening a few times a decade. Wonder what’s happening? :-)
It's a great win just to get the Supreme Court to hear a case. I know that feeling all to well. As a Pro Se litigant I argued a landmark case all the way to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit in 1997 in Dutkiewicz v. Clean Harbors which gave all Americans a new Protected Right. My case is the law of the land now I surely hope this man wins because it will help to protect all Americans under the "Takings Clause".
Thomas Dutkiewicz
Thank you for you effort. MY Dad used to say you cannot fight City Hall and warriors like you spit in the face of that sentiment.
I thank you also
Have you heard of Yusef El HFR??
It the Supreme Courts duty and obligation to hear every civil rights claim . That statutes crap is bullshit. Those are what are known as counterfeit or color of law . So how is it possible that the Bill of Rights has to be in alignment with administrative corporate unlawful lies?
It's already established law dude. A statute, a code, a resolution, an ordinance are all policies that have no backing of law. They only operate by contract with other corporations, not man !
On a basic human level, regardless of the BS law they're hiding behind, Texas should recognise the wrong they did this family and compensate them accordingly.
Why the heck weren't some culverts put in under the highway???
@@veramae4098In very bad flooding conditions, a culvert turns into directed erosion and can collapse the roadway. What the state should have done was not to put in culverts, but to construct a canal network to channel water flow outward in a controlled manner.
One of the problems you get into is that this is the Federal Interstate Highway System. Yes the state did the work, but it was for a federally funded road. It comes down to future liability. In order for Texas to continue to receive funding to maintain the Interstate system they have to make the mandated improvements. What they don't want to have happen is to be on the hook financially when those updates cause problems. The Texas position is Fed road, Fed problem. Had this been a state highway then Texas would be on the hook.
Texas has never cared for any human.
Perhaps Texas can inform the feds that this was their fault, so they will pay.
If the feds balk. Then simply close this part of the interstate, as it has proven to be dangerous to people living near it.
If I were to alter the natural drainage from my land, I would be held responsible for the damages caused to my neighbors land. I would think the government should be as well.
The government needs to pay for what it takes!
Thank you for sharing this story, may justice prevail 🙏 prayers for you folks.
Huge fan of you and Steve Lheto! IJ is literally protecting my children’s rights! Thank you for IJ
Lheto is a shit lawyer. There are two types. Ones that practice, and ones that talk... about practicing. And it takes a whole lot of talking to stand above ones legal peers... But Lheto does it with great ease.
@@ShainAndrews don’t remember asking you anything. Literally was not talking to you. 👍.
@@charlesf.5414 The internet is probably not your safe space junior.
Lehto, not Lheto.
The Bill of Rights set the FLOOR of protection.
A State law or State constitution can provide More protection, but not less.
What an important case. This family needs justice.
This looks like another egregious example of the state of our judicial system. The courts seem to be more than willing to ignore what should be obvious under the law.
Why would they obey law when you keep buying billionaires junk at extreme prices giving the rich endless amounts of money to control them? It's your fault, do you really need that $6
God bless Institute for Justice for your work, and my prayers are with this family.
Godless America!
*Respectfully for the court:* would a private citizen be liable if they had taken action to flood this man's property? The answer is obviously yes. Therefore, we submit what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Hold the government _at least_ to the same level of accountability that a private citizen would be.
Qualified immunity ... Act of God
the flood waters had a natural flow path away pre MAN MADE structure ie. the road barriers @@mrsatire9475
My $100/month working hard. Proud of it. Thank you I.J.
Thank you!
My pleasure for sure@@mrsatire9475
Thanks for your support!!
@@InstituteForJustice my pleasure. WW.
In 2016 Same thing has happened in Louisiana
Flooded thousands of homes
They were launching boats on the West bound side to save people, the east bound side was dry and cars were driving on it.
Louisiana Dotd took no responsibility and said there is nothing that can be done
I’ve been following this case for several years & appreciate the update. Thank you IJ for helping this family (and so many others) to fight back against the machine! 🙏🏼
“If there’s no statute saying Texas has to follow the CONSTITUTION then they don’t have to” I mean I don’t know why we even have rules and laws?
Also, if Texas doesn't follow the constitution, why would you or anyone want to live there?
Apparently theres a way around it.
HFR Yusef El
Texas is run by Republicans at every level. The Republican party does not believe in the Rule of Law. My evidence look at the recent Ken Paxton corruption case or the case where Paxton filed against fellow sovereign States to overturn the 2020 Presidential election, it was unconstitutional, had no standing but Paxton did it anyway wasting taxpayer time & money.
Thank you Instute for Justice ⚖️ for upholding the Constitution of the United States 🇺🇲.
Institute, not Instute.
They’re gonna take that man’s land.
Thanks, IJ 👍
Thank you for legal education
With all the planning, engineering, environmental, etc impact reports that were required for final approval, not sure how this happened.
It was probably all done. What's tragic is that, even when there's an environmental impact report assessing major damage to the environment if the project progresses, developers don't have to pay any attention to it.
Someone signs off. It may be that they knew and ignored it, or they didn't know but should have... but in the end someone said "OK" and that was that.
@eleanoraquitaine2966 This is strictly hydrology, the eir wouldn't encompass it.
NOBODY anticipated something like 40" of rain in 48 hrs from Harvey. Imelda was 24" in 24hrs.
@@DaDuckman05
Yes. It is anticipated. Basic understanding of flood stages and hurricane level rains is known.
Creating a de facto damn with zero drainage an intentional act (not necessary malice) but, intentional. Those responsible should be held accountable and it should be remedied. The damn should be revised and allow waters to drain.
I’m a Florida homebuilder and micro developer, these types of issues are so common in Florida. One of the biggest obstacles is helping people, understand, topography and watersheds. The average American is completely disconnected from nature, I often struggle with clients who purchase land that is poorly situated and we explain to them the Site Work involved in correcting these drainage issues they become irate and shocked. My point is the government is getting away with this because of the ignorance of the electorate.
The ignorance of the electorate? How were those parcels detailed when sold? Yes, buyer beware, but you know damn well, plenty of those land developers didn’t mention how much work would be needed to build a single-family home when they sold it. You can talk about nature all you want but you should probably mention skeezy land developers, whom I’m sure you are forced to call peers.
@@TheYaegerjeusmc we don’t really have any of those issues because all the new developments are very well planned. What I’m talking about are old parcels of five and 10 acre tracks of land, these properties aren’t developer driven it’s just raw undeveloped parcels and old homesteads. People buy them and are ignorant about topography and Sitework costs.
Charles Trudrung - Tayler attorney in Fresno California did a case against civil engineers about pine flat reservoir in kings county California. Water control issues were involved in the case.
My uncle Charles won case against civil engineers. 1980's era.
Good info, hope folks that need it read it.
Hat in hand is how they think we should be..... like we're freaking Oliver Twist requesting more soup.
This choked me up. Keep fighting!!! It’s for all of us.
Thank you I.J.
Yup, Texas, sounds about right.
At this point, with the grant of cert, Texas should probably double think their whole position. If this court took this case, I expect them to uphold the landowner's rights.
After my limited experience with TXDoT, I'm pretty surprised the engineers didn't account for the flooding and mitigate it. Those environmental studies that everyone complains about for slowing construction? This kind of thing is what those studies are supposed to prevent. They're not just about endangered species and wetlands. Anyway, yeah they should pay.
They did not care.
I'd like to see some of those studies and considerations for this project. The way this is described one half of the interstate floods at every major storm. That's a hard engineering fail when it didn't occur before the revision. Just about anywhere they would take additional action to resolve it.
Thanks to Institute for Justice for Recently Agreeing to Sue City of Brentwood, MO, for Plans to take Real Estate from Several Businesses for Grandiose Redevelopment.
You guys ROCK, Prayers that you win..
I live in Texas. Thank you So Much. Abbot. !!!?
Thanks for uploading more than 12 seconds this time
Thanks IJ for all you guys do!
Keep up the good work
What is the process if you didn't want to give Texas the land but only want the situation fixed and the land returned to pre-load status?
Thank you IJ, you're true American heros!
A really sad state that has led to our own government drowning out it's people and the land. Save us from our rotten government. SOS 🆘
God bless you!
Ya'll have Steve Lehto to thank for me watching and donating. You are doing the Lord's work and we have your back!
Steve is a treasure! Thanks for your support 🙏
Keep Pressing!
Need to make it a Gregg Abbott re-election issue.
The Canadian government pays my family for the damage our road salt does to the corn fields along the major highway in my area.
We have about 25-40 feet of salt burned soil we don't pay taxes on for a couple miles.
There was never even a discussion they just offered.
Well, you have a new government that doesn't care about you in the least, good luck getting paid in the future.
@@Mortlupo What are you talking about... nothing has changed. You should consider therapy.
The state of Texas owes this family a lot of money. They took his land and misused it causing irreparable harm & damage.
This the sort of terrible thing that I felt like could Never happen in Texas. Obviously I was wrong…
lol
Keep up the great work that you do.
Quick question, wasn't this exact issue resolved by the US Supreme Court with Pumpelly v. Green Bay Company in 1871? Taking is taking. It doesn't matter if it is permanent or temporary, purposeful or accidental.
They didn't take the land, the ranchers still have their land and they better keep up on their property taxes!
@@mrsatire9475 But that was the point of Pumpelly v. Green Bay Company. The company was working for Wisconsin to build a canal, but in the process accidentally flooded Pumpelly's land, destroying his farm in the process. The SC stated that this still constitutes taking even if it was temporary and accidental. There is A LOT of case law and even statute law that is built on this principle.
Pumpelly's situation over 150 years ago is virtually identical to the situation that this man faces.
@@peteranderson037 No, in that case there was a deliberate act to control an existing body of water and direct to land that did not have that water. In this case, there was no water, no water works. Just the occasional act of God flooding land that God has been flooding for centuries.
@@mrsatire9475 Except God hasn't been flooding that land until after the highway change.
@@Jason.family False. That land has been flooded before
force them to put drains under the road -
8:35 So nothing in the Bill of Rights actually applies unless there is a statute to support it? That's absurd, and I don't know how the courts can even entertain the question.
God bless this organization
Godless America!
Instead of spending money fighting this, why doesn't TDOT just take the money and put drainage across, under the road🤷
They have replaced solid concrete barriers every so often with barriers that have large openings on the bottom half of the barrier.
Because the powers that be have always had their heads jammed so far up their asses they can't see who gets affected. They don't care because they don't know what they're doing but their book says they're doing it right
@@DaDuckman05 the road bed still holds water back, especially if the road is above the house and land elevation. Culverts would have to be put UNDER the road
Horizontal drill it
Heroes - capes = IJ. Hope they take on civil asset forfeiture at the federal level as well.
I’m a lifelong resident of Texas & I had no idea the Texas could either chose to do the right thing for these other lifelong residents of Texas, or not. It seems to me that the 5th Amendment states “Clearly” what the Founding Fathers meant. If the Government (National, State, City) takes something that is not rightfully theirs, fix the issue or pay those you have wronged. IMO, in the early days of our country, the Founding Fathers had no idea what the United States would become & they wanted everyone to know that if they were wronged by the Government, the Government was responsible for righting the wrong.
Keep up the Good Work IJ. We the people need you now more than ever.
Texas is doing a lot of this. Happened in Prairie View Tx. My Aunt lost her home because of the flooding when they graded and changed the road aways away. IJ go get 'em. The State should repair and pay.
There is a similar situation going on in Munds Park AZ, right now.
I would feel for him more, if I could HEAR his story.
They have a video on it. I watched it last year, so you may have to scroll at least a year to find it.
I wish you good luck
Have they not heard of culverts in Texas?
No residential or commercial construction can begin without proper drainage. Be interesting to find out if the company that planned and built the highway knew flooding was going to occur.
Here's an idea...
Land owner has his land surveyed, then builds a tall berm along the edge of his land that faces the highway.
The next rain comes along, highway floods, and landowner sets back and watches the show.
And "No, I will not be removing the berm on my property".
With Eminent Domain everyone is at risk, whether or not they are "fairly" or "justly" compensated.
Any governments version of fair compensation is $1 that is taxed at $1
Good luck and don’t mess with Texas. That means the people not the bureaucracy.
If you're into the legal side of things, lein the bonds!
It astounds me that the TX decision was "Congress has to pass a law saying we have to abide by the 5th" when each state was REQUIRED to abide by the Constitution in its entirety in order to join the U.S.A.
No law passing, no acts of Congress...this is the law of the land, you MUST follow it.
How can any judge get that wrong???
So according to the appeals court the constitution with its amendments are just a suggestion and as long as the states don’t pass laws confirming it, they don’t need to abide by it.
United States Congressional Records March 17, 1993 sec. 33 page H-1303 . There is absolutely no statute that can abrogate or suspended any laws of the American lands.
Funny (not) how so many "experts" seem to lack foresight, or are incapable of seeing the "big picture". They build, with no sense of unplanned impact. Many years ago, Massachusetts replaced an old bridge that connected the the town of Newbury, on the mainland, to Plum Island, an island that is surrounded by a combination of ocean, a river, and tidal basins. The original bridge stood on wooden posts and it spanned an area of tidal marsh. The replacement bridge was a solid slab of concrete that arced up in the center. When the tides came in and the marshes flooded (as they always have) both ends of the new bridge - plus part of the road - went a few feet under water, because the "experts" didn't think to install culverts - to give the water a place to go! The state had to redo the bridge. Similar happened in Texas, no foresight regarding rain, patterns of runoff, etc.
Just what you'd expect from Texas.
Unfortunately, it seems like they owned their land like everybody else. If you have a land patent, you are the god of that land. Nobody can screw with that land at all without paying you, and there's no statute that makes any difference. That is common law stuff, and it is concrete.
Native Indians enters chat:
Mexico enters chat:
Have the State truck in enough free rock and dirt to raise an island on the property large enough to build a castle.
Change the drainage, pay the price
That's a nice dam there, be a shame if it blew up releasing all that water.
Texas should be forced to pay for the lost cattle, pay for the profit that the farm lost because of these floods. And they should also be forced to either design a new drainage system to make sure this doesn't happen again or to buy their land at what it was worth before the flooding started. But i have this nagging feeling that these farmers will never be made truly whole even if they do win.
Forced, not foreced.
@@duanehorton4680 obviously that was a typo. 🙄
Is it legal to buy land around someone's house and build a dam in such a way, their property becomes the resvior?
This is a no brainer.
Is the constitution the law of the land or isn't it. I would like to know.
Wish institue for Justice would do something about RUclips stealing from small channels and doing their absolute best to keep small channels down. They stop our videos to advertise, which stops our watch time and then refuse to pay us because we do not have enough watch time. And I know RUclips watchtime thing is messed up because I had a friend watch 10 hours of my videos and my watch time barely went up. Then to top it off RUclips refuses to give us any kind of support at all.
I've got audio.
Damnnnnnn 😮
This video works now, and keep up the good work!
2:18 Texas Department of Transportation (D.O.T.), gave assurances, "It will never happen again."
Not only did it happen once, it happened again 2 years later. How can the owner be expected to tolerate this? And this is the reason impact studies are supposed to be made.
Possibly it won't happen again, anytime soon, but there are generations to think of. How permanent is the highway? Then you need to think of the problem it's going to cause for people who live in the area.
D.O.T. is responsible for the damages. If they don't fix the problem, then they will have to pay for the damages every single time.
The people will figure out a way to get rid of the water, then the government will sue them for destroying a wetland.
Heroes
😊
I'm curious. Did they still demand this property owner to pay the taxes?
Wow
They should pay for all damages X’s.
I bought 640 acres of land in Nevada, with the intent of planting a vineyard and after a few years, opening a winery. The local university has been growing high desert hybridized grape vines for decades, with varietals that are optimized for desert climates. I went to the county (only 6400 people) and told them my plans. Their answer was "no, your land is not zoned for anything except agriculture, recreation or mining". So...as far as I'm concerned, this is a classical "taking" of my right to use my land in a legal manner; to grow grapes, to produce wine. I called them (the county employees) a bunch of collectivists and just kind of had to leave it at that. Petty bureaucrats will be the bane of our civilization and culture.
Um…growing grapes is agriculture.
@@ronnie-being-ronnie but making wine, according to them, is not. There's not enough profit in just growing grapes.
@@raymondzehrung9274
Sounds like you need to talk to established vineyards and ask about their zoning to establish precedent, if possible. It’s not actually the county’s business if your grapes are profitable enough, or not.
If you can find how other vineyards set up their businesses, you can sue the county for falsely inhibiting your land use.
Also check state agriculture laws. Some states have a “right to farm” law that overrides county level bullies.
In FL, I wrote to the head of our agriculture dept to establish my right to sell worm castings as manure because they had existing laws for selling cow manure set up by the powerful cattle lobby.
Prove out your steps…the benefits of the shade created by the vines for the soil biome. The beneficial uses for the spent grapes, the leaves and trimmed vines. The tax income you project for the county from your property improvements, and include any water conservation efforts with scientific studies to back them up. Simple things, like burying logs to retain moisture for the roots, composting, mulching, and drip irrigation…water collection from facility roofing…
Just throw the laws and the science at them, plus the money they are losing by stopping you.
Petty bureaucrats win when you let them stop you. Good luck 👍🏼
PS on the established laws…be sure to read the definitions provided! It can be key to getting your foot in the door. Also look at Federal agriculture sites and universities to establish how vineyards are indeed agricultural.
PPS usda + vineyard
www.rd.usda.gov/newsroom/success-stories/vineyard-uses-rural-development-funding-help-grow-more-grapes
USDA site search result page
search.usa.gov/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=usda-rd&query=Vineyard&commit=
I suppose the Question Presented is whether there is a "Bivens" type of "cause of action" for the Fifth Amendment Takings right to just compensation.
If is were a local government, a party could use 42usc1983 for a "cause of action" statute but for the state and federal governments there is no "cause of action" federal statute -- although there is a Federal Tort Claims Act for federal government and I don't know if it would be required to exhaust the FTCA first or not (although I do not believe it should be required).
If there is a Texas Tort Claims Act, I think SCOTUS has aready effectively held that it need not be exhausted to raise a Takings claim.
PS EDIT
I see the case is about State government BUT there apparently was no 42usc1983 claim raised.
A motion to amend might be able to cure that early on on a case, but after a final decision on the merits, res judicata might apply.
Personally, I believe there is an inherent cause of action for all federal rights but the courts have not agreed thus far. :-0)
I though statutes are a subordinate law. We have no real ownership of property. We barely own the equity in our property. I wish them well in their case.
going to the court that ruled how it did in Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 and expecting a positive outcome from this is like thinking Slippy Rock winning the national championship
Should have, could have been a raised elevated highway like so many in LA.
8:55 COTUS is SUPREME LAW, Statute cannot revise or amend COTUS. AMENDMENT to COTUS can override SCOTUS.
As a Tuscarora of North Carolina, you should be made to eat the same meal youve forced us to eat. And be happy by pulling yourself up by the flooded bootstraps. Call it manifest post-destiny.
Dude finds out why he got a deal on his land.
Is this a thing caused by bad engineering to begin with? Can it be corrected at all or is it now just down to money? Of course both need to come into it but it sounds like the plan is to just go ahead and pay and keep wrecking the land.
Without seeing exactly what's going on its hard to say, but if the couple graphics they showed are accurate then it can be fixed and is just a matter of money but they're not going to do anything.
THE CONSTITUTION IS A LAW THAT THE GOVERNMENTS SWEARS TO UPHOLD BY OATH !
BUT THEY STILL SPIT ON IT, WITH CASES LIKE THESE ?
Another possible angle of attack would be to point out how holding that water back means the government is degrading thousands of acres that used to rely on that water flowing to them. They never did an "Environmental Impact Study", right? So how do they know the damage they're doing by not allowing the free flow of water, or by forcing so much water where there should never have been any? The environmental damage is pretty severe because they're literally flooding hundreds of acres of native habitat, and that means killing millions of insects, pollinators, small mammals, etc.
It probably would have been longer had they not moved to Oregon or had any of this happen thats alot of stress
Would you ke to get consideration for a case with IJ. How do I do this?
Hi there, to submit a potential case please visit ij.org/report-abuse
Don’t get your hopes up. Remember Kelo v. City of New London.