Both the majority and the dissent appear to agree that this decision conflicts with CA6's finding a violation of the well-established right to bodily autonomy in the Flint Water Crisis.
Majority in first two grabs. Dissent third grab.
We know which way SCOTUS would go if asked to resolve the split
@gabrielmalor.bsky.social5th Cir. en banc holds that there is no 14A substantive due process right to be free from exposure to contaminated water or to accurate information from public officials.
Background: city mismanaged water utility. Ps are trying to fit lead exposure into § 1983.
www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub...
