Siding with SpaceX and the attorney general’s office, the Texas Supreme Court on Friday ruled that environmental groups did not have a right to sue to preserve public access to a beach that has been closed during rocket launches.
The unanimous ruling said a trial judge properly dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, meaning the groups could not refile it with changes.
The dispute began in 2021 when then environmental group SaveRGV sued the Texas General Land Office, Commissioner Dawn Buckingham and Cameron County, arguing Boca Chica Beach and State Highway 4 — the only access road — had been improperly closed for SpaceX launches.
SaveRGV said the closures violate the Texas Constitution, which was amended in 2009 to guarantee public access to, and use of, state beaches. The amendment was approved with support from 77% of Texans.
The lawsuit, later joined by the Sierra Club and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, sought to void a 2013 state law that authorized SpaceX to close Boca Chica Beach as a safety precaution during space flights.
The attorney general’s office intervened to defend the law.
In Friday’s opinion, written by Justice Rebeca Huddle, the Supreme Court said the 2009 constitutional amendment expressly stated that there is no private right to sue to enforce beach access.
“The plaintiffs are private parties — organizations whose beachgoing members claim the temporary closures of Boca Chica Beach conflict with their constitutional right to access and use the beach,” Huddle wrote.
The Federal Aviation Administration licensed the SpaceX rocket site at Boca Chica Beach after Elon Musk’s company proved it could restrict public access to the launch area through House Bill 2623, the 2013 law that amended the state’s Open Beaches Act.
Save RGV argued the beach closures allowed by that 2013 law interfere with the “beach-access rights” of members who perform conservation work at the beach or use it for recreation.
The ruling by the state’s highest civil court stopped short of deciding whether the Texas Constitution trumps laws that limit beach access. Instead, it focused on whether the trial judge had properly dismissed the case because the 2009 amendment specified there was no private right to sue.
“The trial court was thus correct to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction,” the decision stated.
The ruling noted the tribe also complained that SpaceX beach closures interfere with members’ ability to practice their religion — an issue that may be able to be raised in a separate lawsuit.
“Today’s holding should not be construed to prohibit the Tribe — or private parties generally — from seeking relief for such injuries they suffer due to HB 2623. We hold only that [the open beaches amendment of the constitution] cannot serve as the basis for that relief,” Huddle wrote.
Disclosure: Texas General Land Office has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.
by Terri Langford and Chuck Lindell, The Texas Tribune
This article first appeared on The Texas Tribune.