Residents of Jackson, Mississippi, say their city government knowingly exposed them to lead-contaminated drinking water and then failed to tell them the truth about it.
The Fifth Circuit just ruled that the Constitution doesn’t give them a constitutional right to clean water.
In a decision handed down Friday, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit brought by Jackson residents who alleged that city officials allowed lead to contaminate their drinking water and misled residents about the danger.
Writing for the court, Trump-appointed Judge Kurt Engelhardt said the alleged deprivation of clean water and accurate information was “grievous”—but did not violate a constitutional right.
“The Constitution does not provide redress for every governmental wrongdoing,” Engelhardt wrote.
He also rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the contamination violated their constitutional right to bodily integrity.
“We are skeptical that the right to not be harmed by lead-contaminated water fits within the right to bodily integrity,” Engelhardt wrote.
And he went further.
The court found no “constitutional right to truthful information from officials during a public health crisis.”
According to Engelhardt, the ruling means that the Constitution itself does not provide the particular federal civil-rights remedy the plaintiffs sought under the Fourteenth Amendment.
This wasn’t just a theoretical case
The lawsuit centers on allegations that Jackson’s water system had serious problems that exposed residents to lead and other contaminants.
The plaintiffs alleged that city officials knew about the danger and nevertheless failed to adequately address it. They also alleged that officials told residents the water was safe despite knowing about contamination.
The Fifth Circuit acknowledged that Jackson’s water system has had serious deficiencies. The opinion notes that the system has produced water containing lead, E. coli and other bacteria, experienced major service disruptions and required numerous boil-water notices.
The plaintiffs also alleged that city officials’ actions contributed to lead leaching into the water and that misleading assurances caused residents to continue drinking it.
One plaintiff, Priscilla Sterling, alleged that several of her children were diagnosed with lead poisoning. Lead exposure can cause serious and lasting health problems, particularly in children.
The court did not rule that the allegations were harmless.
Engelhardt acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations while concluding that they did not fit within the narrow category of rights that courts have recognized as protected by substantive due process.
“However,” he wrote, “the Constitution does not provide a remedy for Plaintiffs’ injuries.”
The decision came from the Fifth Circuit sitting en banc, meaning the case was considered by the full group of participating judges rather than the usual three-judge panel.
The court was deciding a narrower—and highly consequential—question: whether the Constitution recognizes the specific rights the residents asserted and allows them to seek damages under federal civil-rights law.
The conservative majority said no.
The ruling arrives as the Trump administration is also moving to narrow the scope of federal clean-water protections.
On Friday, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers announced another round of proposed changes to the definition of which streams, wetlands and other waters are covered by the Clean Water Act. The agencies said they were seeking additional public input after the Supreme Court’s 2023 Sackett v. EPA decision narrowed the federal government’s authority over wetlands.
Critics say the proposed changes could leave more waterways outside federal protection. The administration says the revisions are intended to create clearer rules while respecting the Supreme Court’s ruling and giving states and tribes greater authority over water resources.
Put those developments together, and the Jackson case lands in a much bigger debate over what Americans can expect from their government when the water coming out of their taps isn’t safe.
