PRESS RELEASE December 20, 2021
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 20, 2021
Contact: Desi Burns Porter
desi@TexansAgainstHSR.com
TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL AND SOLICITOR GENERAL STAND WITH LANDOWNER IN HIGH-SPEED RAIL EMINENT DOMAIN CASE
Texas AG Ken Paxton and SG Judd Stone Weighs in at Texas Supreme Court with State Position Regarding Landowner Appeal and Recommends Court Reverse Dangerous Eminent Domain Ruling
Jewett, Texas – Solicitor General Judd Stone II and Attorney General Ken Paxton filed an amicus brief on Friday evening (Dec. 17) in the Jim Miles v. Texas Central case before the Texas Supreme Court, fully supporting Leon County landowners Jim and Barbara Miles. The full brief can be viewed here.
The Solicitor General and Attorney General based their support on statutory and constitutional grounds. We are encouraged by the State’s strong show of support for Texas private property rights.
SG Stone wrote in the brief, “The State takes no position on the wisdom or utility of building a high-speed train between Dallas and Houston. But private actors who seek to seize private property using eminent-domain powers must strictly comply with statutory and constitutional conditions governing the use of such powers. Respondents [Texas Central and ITL] have not.”
For seven years, the proposed Dallas to Houston HSR project has weighed heavily on Texas landowners, abused their private property rights, and encumbered real estate transactions. After an initial trial court ruling in favor of Miles in 2018, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals reversed it in 2019. The Texas Supreme Court initially denied Miles’ petition to hear his case, but granted rehearing and set oral argument on Miles’ appeal for January 11, 2022.
Currently, Texas Central has no permit to construct its project, nor has it even applied for a construction permit with the federal level Surface Transportation Board. Texas Central does not have the majority of the land needed to complete the project, including the three proposed station locations, as the owners of those properties recently indicated their desire to sell the property to any HSR provider willing and able to purchase. Since 2014, Texas Central has told the public, elected officials, and investors that the project would be entirely privately financed, yet recently reversed course and began lobbying for Infrastructure Plan funds. In need of a reported $30B to complete the project, the Infrastructure Plan passed by Congress does not include specific funding for the project or general funds for which the company would qualify.
The brief filed by the SG’s office is clear that the past activities, corporate structure and financial state of the project coupled with the very high level of uncertainty that the project would ever even be built does not meet a threshold that would support Texas Central’s claim that it has eminent domain authority.
The brief reads, “Respondents are not operating anything resembling a railroad. That they might possibly do so someday is not enough. The second category refers to small, localized, electric railways that are designed to transport passengers between a city and its surrounding areas. Respondents’ proposed multi-billion dollar, cross-state, high-speed train does not fit the bill.”
“Respondents also cannot satisfy constitutional constraints requiring private actors to demonstrate a ‘reasonable probability’ that they will complete their public-use project. Simply put, the Respondents failed to establish a likelihood that they will ever succeed in raising the substantial capital required to complete their high-speed train, let alone that such a train will one day actually operate and serve the public interest. This Court should accordingly reverse and render judgment for Miles.”
Texans Against High-Speed Rail and Jim and Barbara Miles appreciate the time and effort of Attorney General Paxton, Solicitor General Judd Stone II, and their staff for this clear and definitive amicus brief and feel confident the Supreme Court of Texas will strongly consider this position held by the State to protect private property rights.
The Solicitor General and Attorney General based their support on statutory and constitutional grounds. We are encouraged by the State’s strong show of support for Texas private property rights.
SG Stone wrote in the brief, “The State takes no position on the wisdom or utility of building a high-speed train between Dallas and Houston. But private actors who seek to seize private property using eminent-domain powers must strictly comply with statutory and constitutional conditions governing the use of such powers. Respondents [Texas Central and ITL] have not.”
For seven years, the proposed Dallas to Houston HSR project has weighed heavily on Texas landowners, abused their private property rights, and encumbered real estate transactions. After an initial trial court ruling in favor of Miles in 2018, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals reversed it in 2019. The Texas Supreme Court initially denied Miles’ petition to hear his case, but granted rehearing and set oral argument on Miles’ appeal for January 11, 2022.
Currently, Texas Central has no permit to construct its project, nor has it even applied for a construction permit with the federal level Surface Transportation Board. Texas Central does not have the majority of the land needed to complete the project, including the three proposed station locations, as the owners of those properties recently indicated their desire to sell the property to any HSR provider willing and able to purchase. Since 2014, Texas Central has told the public, elected officials, and investors that the project would be entirely privately financed, yet recently reversed course and began lobbying for Infrastructure Plan funds. In need of a reported $30B to complete the project, the Infrastructure Plan passed by Congress does not include specific funding for the project or general funds for which the company would qualify.
The brief filed by the SG’s office is clear that the past activities, corporate structure and financial state of the project coupled with the very high level of uncertainty that the project would ever even be built does not meet a threshold that would support Texas Central’s claim that it has eminent domain authority.
The brief reads, “Respondents are not operating anything resembling a railroad. That they might possibly do so someday is not enough. The second category refers to small, localized, electric railways that are designed to transport passengers between a city and its surrounding areas. Respondents’ proposed multi-billion dollar, cross-state, high-speed train does not fit the bill.”
“Respondents also cannot satisfy constitutional constraints requiring private actors to demonstrate a ‘reasonable probability’ that they will complete their public-use project. Simply put, the Respondents failed to establish a likelihood that they will ever succeed in raising the substantial capital required to complete their high-speed train, let alone that such a train will one day actually operate and serve the public interest. This Court should accordingly reverse and render judgment for Miles.”
Texans Against High-Speed Rail and Jim and Barbara Miles appreciate the time and effort of Attorney General Paxton, Solicitor General Judd Stone II, and their staff for this clear and definitive amicus brief and feel confident the Supreme Court of Texas will strongly consider this position held by the State to protect private property rights.
###