On a Friday in 2024, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans handed down a ruling that may reshape how millions of Americans understand the relationship between their government and their tap water. The court upheld the dismissal of a 2022 lawsuit filed by residents of Jackson, Mississippi — a majority-Black city whose drinking water had been contaminated by elevated lead levels and other pollutants for years. The plaintiffs had argued that exposure to tainted water, and the failure of officials to disclose it, amounted to a violation of their constitutional rights. The court disagreed, flatly.

The majority opinion stated that the residents were seeking "recognition of two new constitutional rights lacking any foundation in the history and tradition of our nation" — specifically, the right to be free from contaminated water and the right to accurate information from public officials. In the court's view, those grievances should have been pursued through tort claims, through the ballot box, or through petitions to elected representatives. The opinion also held that a state has no constitutional duty to provide substantive services to its residents unless a "special relationship" exists, and that municipalities are not constitutionally obligated to manage water treatment or sewerage "in a reasonably competent fashion." The ruling did not dismiss the underlying crisis as fiction.

The majority acknowledged allegations of "serious government misfeasance" and described itself as sympathetic, while noting that state and federal authorities had been working for years through regulations, investigations and compliance plans to improve Jackson's water quality. That combination — sympathy without remedy — is precisely what critics of the decision find most troubling. Jackson's water failures have drawn comparisons to Flint, Michigan, where lead contamination became a symbol of environmental injustice a decade ago. Both cities are predominantly Black; both saw warnings ignored for years.