Devillier v. Texas, No. 22-913 (Oyez)

Issue(s): Whether a person whose property is taken without compensation may seek redress under the self-executing takings clause of the Fifth Amendment even if the legislature has not affirmatively provided them with a cause of action.

Read the overviews and skim the initial briefs (including those from 3rd parties) to try to get a sense of what's going on and who wants what outcomes. Focus on the substantive issues: try to weed out and ignore any ancillary or procedural issues (unless that's the main issue). Listen to a healthy part of the oral arguments if it's available. I suggest making an attempt to understand the cases first through the briefs, then checking your understanding through the SCOTUSblog articles. I also suggest Googling the case and reading commentary from various perspectives. When considering how it should be decided, try to put aside your feelings about the original case and how it may affect the litigants. Many of these litigants are in fact political activists, and they've been chosen strategically by political organizations as the face of a long-running political fight. At this stage, the issue is what the law will be for all of us for years to come. https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/devillier-v-texas/ 1.What are the facts of this case? (explain what happened leading to the adjudication/dispute)

2.What is the appellate case about?

a. explain what the original appellant alleged is wrong

b. explain what the other party argues (why it's NOT wrong)

c. note the decisions on this by the lower courts in this case

3.What provision of the Constitution or Federal Law is at issue?

4.What is the current interpretation of law in this area? (what do the most recent relevant Supreme Court decisions imply that the law is today?)

5.How will the Court's decision this year potentially affect society?

6.How do you hope it will be decided? Why so?

7.How do you predict it will be decided? Why so? (use your legal realist knowledge)