The Texas Supreme Court sided with SpaceX and the General Land Office in a ruling issued on Friday, determining that environmental organizations lacked the legal standing to sue for public access to a beach that has been shut down during rocket launches.
This unanimous decision affirmed that a trial judge appropriately dismissed the case with prejudice, preventing the groups from refiling it with modifications.
The conflict traces back to 2021 when the environmental group SaveRGV initiated a lawsuit against the Texas General Land Office, its Commissioner Dawn Buckingham, and Cameron County. The lawsuit contended that the closure of Boca Chica Beach and the sole access road, State Highway 4, for SpaceX launches was improper.
SaveRGV argued that these closures breached the Texas Constitution, which was revised in 2009 to ensure public access to and use of state beaches, an amendment that received approval from 77% of Texas voters.
The lawsuit, which later included the Sierra Club and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Nation of Texas, aimed to invalidate a 2013 state law that permitted SpaceX to close Boca Chica Beach for safety reasons during space flights.
The attorney general’s office intervened to uphold the law. In the opinion rendered on Friday by Justice Rebeca Huddle, the Supreme Court stated that the 2009 constitutional amendment explicitly indicated there is no private right to sue for enforcing 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 noted.
Following the passage of House Bill 2623 in 2013, the Federal Aviation Administration licensed the SpaceX rocket site at Boca Chica Beach, which allowed for public access restrictions during launch activities.
SaveRGV contended that the closures permitted by this law infringed upon the “beach-access rights” of members who engage in conservation efforts or utilize the beach for recreation.
The recent ruling from the state’s highest civil court did not address whether the Texas Constitution overrides laws that restrict beach access. Instead, it concentrated on the validity of the trial judge’s dismissal of the case, which was based on the 2009 amendment’s specification regarding the absence of a private right to sue.
“The trial court was thus correct to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction,” the decision indicated.
Marisa Perales, an attorney from Austin representing the environmental groups and the tribe, expressed concern over the ruling, stating it prioritizes SpaceX’s interests over the rights of Texans and undermines the effectiveness of the open beaches amendment.
“The government has essentially given Boca Chica Beach to SpaceX to use as its blast zone for its rocket launches and other related activities, and the Supreme Court appears to have endorsed that decision, by saying that the affected public has no remedy to enforce their constitutional right to access their own beach,” Perales commented in an email.
Attorney General Ken Paxton praised the ruling, asserting that Texas law permits segments of a beach to be secured for public safety, a measure he believes is necessary for ensuring SpaceX’s operational safety during launches.
The ruling also acknowledged that the tribe raised concerns about how the beach closures impede their religious practices, an issue that could potentially be addressed 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 clarified.
