In Re Richard Devillier, et al.

In DeVillier v. Texas, 601 U.S. 285 (2024), this Court vacated the Fifth Circuit’s judgment and remanded with instructions that, “[o]n remand, DeVillier and the other property owners should be permitted to pursue their claims under the Takings Clause through the cause of action available under Texas law.” Id. at 293. This Court’s judgment directed the lower courts to conduct “further proceedings consistent with the opinion of this Court.” Following remand, consistent with this Court’s mandate, plaintiffs amended their complaint in the trial court to include an additional claim under Texas common law giving effect to the Takings Claus. But the district court—rather than permitting Petitioners to pursue their Takings Clause claims in federal court as this Court directed—remanded the action to the four state courts from which the State had first removed them. The question presented is: Whether a district court defies this Court’s mandate when, instead of permitting plaintiffs to pursue their federal Takings Clause claims in federal court as this Court directed, it remands the entire action to state court, stripping plaintiffs of the federal forum this Court’s judgment contemplated.