Add as preferred on Google
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 4 that residents who alleged they were harmed by lead-contaminated drinking water in Jackson, Mississippi, could not pursue constitutional claims against the city under federal civil-rights law.
The plaintiffs alleged that city officials allowed lead to enter the drinking-water system and then incorrectly told residents the water was safe to drink despite knowing it likely was not.
The court affirmed dismissal of their claims, finding that the injuries alleged were not constitutionally cognizable.
“The Constitution does not provide redress for every governmental wrongdoing,” the court wrote, directing the plaintiffs instead toward tort claims, political remedies, and other avenues. The court also stated that “the Constitution does not guarantee clean water.”
The decision applies to federal courts in Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas, rather than Oregon, which is part of the Ninth Circuit.
Oregon Advocates Pursue Constitutional Right to Clean Water
In Oregon, meanwhile, environmental advocates are pursuing a state constitutional amendment that would establish rights to a healthy environment, including clean air and water.
Third Act Oregon says proposed amendment language is being finalized by the Oregon Constitutional Environmental Rights Amendment (OCERA) and Our Children’s Trust legal teams before being submitted to the Oregon Secretary of State for approval.
Tidings Data Snapshot
States With Constitutional Environmental Rights| State | Adopted | Constitutional Protection |
|---|---|---|
| Pennsylvania | 1971 | Clean air and pure water |
| Montana | 1972 | Clean and healthful environment |
| Hawaii | 1978 | Clean and healthful environment |
| New York | 2021 | Clean air, water and a healthful environment |
Sources: Pennsylvania, Montana, Hawaii and New York state constitutionsDailyTidings.com
If approved, supporters plan to begin gathering signatures in an effort to qualify the measure for the November 2028 ballot.
Third Act Oregon said, “Oregonians have rights protected by our state constitution, but rights to clean air and water are not among them.”
The group argues that constitutional protections would provide stronger safeguards against changing governments and corporate interests than environmental regulations alone. But the proposed amendment has not yet qualified for the ballot.
Be the first to comment.