Sterling v. City of Jackson

No. 24-60370 (5th Cir. Nov. 17, 2025) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · November 17, 2025 · No. No. 24-60370

Summary

The Fifth Circuit reviews the dismissal of a class action arising from allegations that Jackson, Mississippi, contaminated its drinking water with lead and misrepresented the water's safety. The court holds that the allegations plausibly state a Fourteenth Amendment bodily-integrity claim, while concluding that the individual city officials are entitled to qualified immunity because the right was not clearly established in this context. The court reverses in part, affirms in part, and remands.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Writing for the Court
Haynes, Circuit Judge; Dennis, Circuit Judge; Engelhardt, Circuit Judge
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decision date
November 17, 2025
Docket number
No. 24-60370
Procedural posture
Plaintiffs appealed from the district court's judgment on the pleadings dismissing their substantive due process claims and declining supplemental jurisdiction over their state-law claims.
Standard of review
De novo review of a Rule 12(c) judgment on the pleadings; the court applies the same standard as Rule 12(b)(6), accepts well-pleaded facts as true, and views them in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs.
Precedential value
Published and precedential Fifth Circuit opinion
Parties
Priscilla Sterling, Raine Becker, Shawn Miller, John Bennett v. The City of Jackson, Mississippi, Chokwe A. Lumumba, Tony Yarber, Kishia Powell, Robert Miller, Jerriot Smash, Trilogy Engineering Services, L.L.C.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded

Topics

substantive due processfourteenth amendmentsection 1983qualified immunityappellate procedure

Practice areas

constitutional lawcivil rightsmunicipal liabilityenvironmental and public health lawappellate procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the allegations plausibly stated a Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim based on governmental invasion of bodily integrity.
  2. Whether the allegations plausibly showed deliberate indifference and conscience-shocking conduct.
  3. Whether the individual City officials were entitled to qualified immunity because the asserted bodily-integrity right was not clearly established in the specific context.
  4. Whether the Fifth Circuit should recognize a state-created-danger theory of substantive due process and whether plaintiffs adequately pleaded such a claim against the City.
  5. Whether the district court properly dismissed the state-law claims after dismissing the federal claims.

Holdings

  1. Allegations that the City affirmatively introduced or supplied lead-contaminated water, pumped it into residents' homes, and misrepresented its safety plausibly stated a substantive due process violation of the right to bodily integrity.
  2. Plaintiffs plausibly alleged deliberate indifference because the defendants allegedly knew of the lead-contamination risks and consciously disregarded them over an extended period while affirmatively misrepresenting the water's safety.
  3. The individual City officials were entitled to qualified immunity because, although the allegations plausibly stated a constitutional violation, controlling authority and a robust consensus of persuasive authority did not clearly establish that the specific alleged conduct violated the Fourteenth Amendment at the relevant time.
  4. The Fifth Circuit adopted state-created danger as a viable substantive due process theory.
  5. The dismissal of the state-law claims was vacated because reversal of the federal-claim dismissal restored a basis for possible supplemental jurisdiction.

Key quotations

Because the alleged facts plausibly state that the City violated Plaintiffs’ Fourteenth Amendment right to bodily autonomy, the lawsuit may proceed. (2)
Rather, Plaintiffs allege a violation of the well-established right to bodily integrity, and those allegations, taken as true, plausibly state a claim under the Due Process Clause. (26)
We conclude that a city may not introduce toxins into the water, pump the water to people’s homes, and lie about the water’s safety. (31)
Today, we end decades of confusion and delay and adopt state-created danger as a viable theory in our circuit. (35)

Factual background

Plaintiffs alleged that Jackson knowingly supplied highly corrosive water through an aging system containing lead pipes and fixtures, failed to operate adequate corrosion-control treatment, and switched residents from higher-pH groundwater to lower-pH surface water. They alleged that the City knew of increasing lead levels, delayed notifying residents, repeatedly assured the public that the water was safe, and issued boil notices that increased lead concentration. Plaintiffs and their families allegedly consumed, cooked with, and bathed in the water and suffered lead poisoning and other serious health effects.

Procedural history

Plaintiffs brought a putative class action asserting substantive due process claims for violation of bodily integrity and state-created danger, along with state-law claims, based on allegations that Jackson supplied lead-contaminated water and misrepresented its safety. The district court granted defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, dismissed the federal claims, held the individual officials entitled to qualified immunity, and declined supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims. The Fifth Circuit reversed in part, affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.

Remand instructions

Proceed with the substantive due process claims against the City, including assessment of the state-created-danger claim under the newly adopted test; maintain dismissal of the claims against the individual City officials on qualified-immunity grounds; vacate dismissal of the state-law claims and consider whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…