DeVillier v. Texas, 601 U.S. 285

Property owners, led by Richard DeVillier, own land north of I-10 between Houston and Beaumont, Texas.
Texas installed a 3-foot barrier along I-10 to use the highway as a flood evacuation route, which unintentionally caused flooding on petitioners’ properties during major storms.
Plaintiffs allege this barrier effectively used their property to store stormwater, causing significant damage and amounting to a government taking.
DeVillier and others filed suit in Texas state court, seeking just compensation under both the Texas and U.S. Constitutions.
Texas removed the cases to federal court; the cases were consolidated with inverse condemnation claims under state and federal law.
The Fifth Circuit held that the Takings Clause does not provide a right of action against a state; Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a property owner can sue a state directly under the Takings Clause for just compensation when the legislature has not provided a cause of action	The Takings Clause is self-executing and creates its own cause of action for just compensation	Only statutory provisions (like §1983) can provide such a vehicle, and §1983 does not permit claims against a state	No need to decide if the Takings Clause provides a direct cause of action because Texas law already offers one; plaintiffs may proceed under Texas state law

United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321 (discussing role of case syllabus)
Knick v. Township of Scott, 588 U.S. 180 (Takings Clause is self-executing with respect to compensation)
First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los Angeles, 482 U.S. 304 (discusses self-executing nature of Takings Clause and remedies for takings)
Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (states' duty to enforce the Constitution)
Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706 (states and officers are bound by constitutional obligations)