1 hour ago
5
For residents of Jackson, Mississippi, the question is simple yet difficult to answer: can people expect the water flowing from their taps to be safe to drink? A federal appeals court has now delivered a striking legal answer: not as a constitutional right.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the US Constitution does not guarantee Americans a right to clean drinking water, rejecting a lawsuit brought by residents of Jackson over years of problems with the city's water system. The decision upheld a lower court's dismissal of the case.
What did Jackson citizens allege?
The case was brought by a group of Jackson residents in 2022, who alleged that the city allowed lead to enter the municipal water system and then lied to residents saying the water was safe, though they knew it was not.
“Knowing what is in our water is fundamental to protecting public health,” Caroline Leary, general counsel at the U.S.-based nonprofit Environmental Working Group, told Mongabay by email.Jackson is home to roughly 150,000 people. Nearly a quarter of them are children under 18 who are particularly vulnerable to the potentially lifelong toxic impacts of lead exposure including seizures, lowered IQ, impaired brain development and even death.
The plaintiffs alleged that several of their children have been diagnosed with lead poisoning and now require special educational, medical, sociological, occupational and disability services. The plaintiffs also argued that exposure to contaminated water and the failure to be informed about the risks violated their 14th Amendment due process right to bodily integrity.Jackson's water system has faced serious problems for years.
Residents have dealt with boil-water advisories, low water pressure and periods when water was unavailable altogether. The city's major water crisis in 2022 followed years of infrastructure and treatment problems.The residents' legal argument went beyond saying that officials had failed in their duties. They sought recognition of a constitutional right to be protected from contaminated water and a constitutional right to receive accurate information from public officials about the condition of their water.The appeals court rejected both arguments.
What did the court say?
A November 2025 ruling by a three-judge panel of the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed these claims against the city to proceed. However, on September 4, 2026, the full court ruled against the plaintiffs, stating that the court could not recognise two new constitutional rights, “the right to be free from exposure to contaminated water and the right to accurate information from public officials.”The Fifth Circuit's majority said the plaintiffs were effectively asking the judiciary to establish new constitutional rights that do not have a foundation in the nation's legal history and tradition. The court stated that the Constitution does not guarantee clean water and said municipalities are not constitutionally required to provide water treatment, sewerage or waste-management services in a reasonably competent manner.That does not mean the court declared contaminated water acceptable or ruled that governments have no obligations concerning drinking water. Rather, it found that the Constitution itself does not provide the particular right the residents were asking the court to recognise.The court acknowledged the seriousness of the residents' allegations and said it was sympathetic to the injuries they could suffer. But it concluded that sympathy could not transform the residents' claims into constitutional violations.Instead, the judges pointed toward other avenues, including tort claims, political action and efforts to hold public officials accountable through elections.
Why Jackson's water crisis matters
Jackson's case is rooted in a much larger infrastructure problem. The city's water system has struggled with ageing pipes, treatment facilities, staffing and financial pressures. Federal authorities have previously identified significant deficiencies in the system, while residents have repeatedly faced warnings about the safety and reliability of their water.In 2022, Jackson was thrust into another major water crisis after problems at its main treatment facility contributed to a widespread loss of water pressure. The crisis left residents struggling to obtain safe and reliable running water. The city's predominantly Black population has also made the water crisis part of a broader debate about environmental justice and the distribution of public infrastructure funding.The NAACP has separately accused Mississippi state authorities of diverting federal money intended for Jackson's water infrastructure to predominantly white communities. A civil rights complaint filed in 2022 alleged that this contributed to persistent gaps in access to safe drinking water. The organisation later filed a lawsuit against state officials in 2025.Americans still have protections under federal and state laws governing drinking water quality.
The federal government regulates public drinking water through laws including the Safe Drinking Water Act, while states and local authorities have their own responsibilities and regulations. The court itself noted that state and federal authorities have been working to improve Jackson's water quality through regulations, investigations and compliance plans.
“Plaintiffs have not been left to go at it alone,” the court said.
“The State of Mississippi and federal government have worked for years, and continue today, to improve the city of Jackson’s drinking water quality through regulations, investigations, and compliance plans.”Water is one of the most basic requirements of daily life. People generally do not think about constitutional law when they turn on a kitchen tap. They expect water to be available and safe.But Jackson's residents took their fight into federal court because, for many of them, reliable drinking water had become anything but routine.
