A federal judge on Wednesday heard arguments over whether a civil rights lawsuit accusing St. James Parish of steering hazardous industrial development into majority-Black communities should proceed, as parish officials urged dismissal of the case.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023, was initially dismissed by the district court before being revived last year by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to sue and sent the case back to the lower court. Judge Carl J. Barbier, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, is now determining whether plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to survive the parish’s motion to dismiss, which would allow the case to proceed.

The parish sought review by the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, allowing the Fifth Circuit’s ruling to stand.

Brought by Mt. Triumph Baptist Church and two environmental groups, RISE St. James and Inclusive Louisiana, the lawsuit alleges that the siting of petrochemical and other industrial facilities over decades infringed on residents’ constitutional rights and violated Reconstruction-era civil rights laws. Those practices also contributed to elevated cancer risks in the community, they allege.

The lawsuit seeks to halt new industrial development in majority-Black areas of the parish, and to require changes to the parish’s land-use system to prevent discrimination.

Attorneys from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights and the Environmental Law Clinic at Tulane University are representing the plaintiffs. 

The parish argues the case should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not alleged facts showing unlawful discrimination or other legal violations under the constitutional and federal statutes they cite.

There are 28 industrial facilities in two majority-Black council districts in St. James Parish, the plaintiffs said, while there are only four facilities in the other five districts.

‘Nobody’s that stupid’

Much of the discussion on Wednesday centered on whether the plaintiffs could prove discriminatory intent in the parish’s zoning plan.

The parish’s attorney, Dani Borel, argued that industrial facilities are concentrated in certain parts of St. James Parish because those areas are zoned for industrial use and offer infrastructure that industry seeks, including proximity to the Mississippi River. Zoning decisions, the parish argued, were driven by land-use planning and economic considerations, not race, and emphasized that parish officials have an interest in balancing industrial development with residential growth.

Judge Barbier questioned what it would take for the plaintiffs to prove that the parish was discriminating based on race in its zoning decisions.

“Would it have to be an overt statement by council members, ‘Look, we’re going to discriminate against these Black people by putting these facilities only in their district?’” he asked. “You’re not going to get that, right. Nobody’s that stupid.”

“It could entail a lot of things that are not present here,” Borel responded. “It could be overt statements. It could be other actions by those council members.”

She stressed that the industrial facilities bring jobs to the parish, and that the parish has an interest in promoting economic development. “They couldn’t protect everyone or there would be no industry,” she said.

‘Badge of slavery’

The plaintiffs argued that the siting of the industrial plants represented a pattern of discrimination, even if no representative of the parish government explicitly stated any intent to discriminate.

“The badge of slavery that we challenge in this case is a racially discriminatory land use system, implemented by the government that mistreats the graves of those who were once enslaved in the parish and harms the lives and properties of their descendants,” argued Astha Sharma Pokharel, a staff attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “The system is so geographically tethered to the very site of slavery. You can clearly see former plantations where people were enslaved that have now been transformed into these toxic plants.”

The parish argued that it does not control access to burial sites cited in the lawsuit, many of which are located on privately owned land. Borel said Louisiana law governs unmarked burial grounds through a separate regulatory framework and maintained that an injunction against the parish would not necessarily affect access to or protection of those sites.

Borel declined to provide further comment about the hearing on Wednesday. 

After the hearing, residents from St. James Parish gathered on the courthouse steps.

“We are being sacrificed for these polluters to make money,” said Sharon Lavigne, a St. James resident and the founder of RISE St. James, a faith-based environmental justice organization. “My community is dying.”

But after Wednesday’s court hearing, she felt optimistic.

“I woke up this morning with God on my side, and he spoke to me and told me we are going to be victorious,” she said. “We are going to be victorious. We’re going to win this case.”

A federal judge on Wednesday heard arguments over whether a civil rights lawsuit accusing St. James Parish of steering hazardous industrial development into majority-Black communities should proceed, as parish officials urged dismissal of the case.

The lawsuit, filed in 2023, was initially dismissed by the district court before being revived last year by the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which ruled that the plaintiffs had standing to sue and sent the case back to the lower court. Judge Carl J. Barbier, an appointee of President Bill Clinton, is now determining whether plaintiffs’ allegations are sufficient to survive the parish’s motion to dismiss, which would allow the case to proceed.

The parish sought review by the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case, allowing the Fifth Circuit’s ruling to stand.

Brought by Mt. Triumph Baptist Church and two environmental groups, RISE St. James and Inclusive Louisiana, the lawsuit alleges that the siting of petrochemical and other industrial facilities over decades infringed on residents’ constitutional rights and violated Reconstruction-era civil rights laws. Those practices also contributed to elevated cancer risks in the community, they allege.

The lawsuit seeks to halt new industrial development in majority-Black areas of the parish, and to require changes to the parish’s land-use system to prevent discrimination.

Attorneys from the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights and the Environmental Law Clinic at Tulane University are representing the plaintiffs. 

The parish argues the case should be dismissed because the plaintiffs have not alleged facts showing unlawful discrimination or other legal violations under the constitutional and federal statutes they cite.

There are 28 industrial facilities in two majority-Black council districts in St. James Parish, the plaintiffs said, while there are only four facilities in the other five districts.

‘Nobody’s that stupid’

Much of the discussion on Wednesday centered on whether the plaintiffs could prove discriminatory intent in the parish’s zoning plan.

The parish’s attorney, Dani Borel, argued that industrial facilities are concentrated in certain parts of St. James Parish because those areas are zoned for industrial use and offer infrastructure that industry seeks, including proximity to the Mississippi River. Zoning decisions, the parish argued, were driven by land-use planning and economic considerations, not race, and emphasized that parish officials have an interest in balancing industrial development with residential growth.

Judge Barbier questioned what it would take for the plaintiffs to prove that the parish was discriminating based on race in its zoning decisions.

“Would it have to be an overt statement by council members, ‘Look, we’re going to discriminate against these Black people by putting these facilities only in their district?’” he asked. “You’re not going to get that, right. Nobody’s that stupid.”

“It could entail a lot of things that are not present here,” Borel responded. “It could be overt statements. It could be other actions by those council members.”

She stressed that the industrial facilities bring jobs to the parish, and that the parish has an interest in promoting economic development. “They couldn’t protect everyone or there would be no industry,” she said.

‘Badge of slavery’

The plaintiffs argued that the siting of the industrial plants represented a pattern of discrimination, even if no representative of the parish government explicitly stated any intent to discriminate.

“The badge of slavery that we challenge in this case is a racially discriminatory land use system, implemented by the government that mistreats the graves of those who were once enslaved in the parish and harms the lives and properties of their descendants,” argued Astha Sharma Pokharel, a staff attorney for the Center for Constitutional Rights. “The system is so geographically tethered to the very site of slavery. You can clearly see former plantations where people were enslaved that have now been transformed into these toxic plants.”

The parish argued that it does not control access to burial sites cited in the lawsuit, many of which are located on privately owned land. Borel said Louisiana law governs unmarked burial grounds through a separate regulatory framework and maintained that an injunction against the parish would not necessarily affect access to or protection of those sites.

Borel declined to provide further comment about the hearing on Wednesday. 

After the hearing, residents from St. James Parish gathered on the courthouse steps.

“We are being sacrificed for these polluters to make money,” said Sharon Lavigne, a St. James resident and the founder of RISE St. James, a faith-based environmental justice organization. “My community is dying.”

But after Wednesday’s court hearing, she felt optimistic.

“I woke up this morning with God on my side, and he spoke to me and told me we are going to be victorious,” she said. “We are going to be victorious. We’re going to win this case.”