Freeport, Texas, Family to Appeal in Case to Keep Their Land From Port’s Eminent Domain Abuse

Freeport, Texas—Yesterday, a Texas trial court granted a motion for summary judgment against a group of property owners in Freeport’s historically Black community of East End. The ruling comes after the Texas Court of Appeals rejected a previous attempt to seize the land and remanded the case back to the lower court. The group, represented by the Institute for Justice and Johns & Counsel PLLC, plans to again appeal to the Texas Court of Appeals to overturn the unconstitutional taking of their land in what has been a yearlong fight.

The Marshall family has owned property in the East End section of Freeport since 1940. They, along with several other longstanding families in the area, were forced there after local redlining laws pushed Black families out from the rest of Freeport. To them, the property represents more than just financial value, it has become a symbol of resiliency and resolve.  

In 2020, the Port filed an eminent domain action seeking to take the Marshall family land. While the Marshall family and others pushed back in the courts to defend their land, the Port was already busy bulldozing the area.

That bulldozing was the only plan the Port actually had. In papers filed with the court, the Marshalls argued that taking their land for no reason violates both the Texas and the United States Constitutions, as well as Texas statutes.

Under the Texas Constitution, eminent domain can only be used to take land for public use. But the Port failed time and again to come up with any specific use. As the Court of Appeals wrote: “The Port’s CEO threw out many possible uses for the Landowners’ property, once it belonged to the Port: it could be used for offices, warehouses, roads, storage, inspections, staging for trucks, or refrigerated facilities.”

It followed up by saying, “Private property cannot be imperiled with such nonchalance.”

That ruling led to a remand back to the lower court. There, the Port then revealed that it had actually leased the Marshalls’ property to a private stevedoring company, which built a refrigerated fruit warehouse on behalf of a private company. Further discovery revealed that the Port had been trying to acquire the private company as a shipping customer for decades, and that giving it land for this warehouse was a way of inducing it to relocate.

However, that arrangement violates the Texas Constitution, which specifically requires the “ownership, use, and enjoyment” of the property by either the government or the public at large. And being open to the “public at large” typically means that the public has a “definite right” to use the property, usually under common carrier regulation.

“The Texas Constitution is clear on this matter and we plan on making that clear before the Texas Court of Appeals,” said IJ Senior Attorney Jeffrey Redfern. “The government cannot just use eminent domain to take the Marshalls’ land simply because the Port thought it could. The Constitution demands more.”  

#  #  #

To arrange interviews on this subject, journalists may contact Phillip Suderman, IJ’s Communications Project Manager, at [email protected] or (850) 376-4110. More information on the case is available at: https://ij.org/case/freeport-tx-eminent-domain/  

IJ is the national expert on defending property owners against eminent domain abuse and other property rights violations. IJ has represented property owners fighting eminent domain in Sparta, Georgia, Southold, New York, and others. You can find out more about our work on our website.