Plaintiffs alleged that Jackson's water system produced water containing lead, E. coli and other bacteria, experienced shutdowns and prompted numerous boil-water notices. They further alleged that city actions and failures allowed lead to leach into drinking water and that officials told residents the water was safe despite allegedly knowing otherwise.

The court acknowledged the seriousness of the allegations but said substantive due process protections are limited to rights deeply rooted in the nation's history and tradition. It found no such historical basis for the rights asserted by the plaintiffs and said the Constitution generally does not impose an affirmative duty on municipalities to provide public services, including water treatment, at a particular level of competence.

The ruling also rejected the plaintiffs' argument that their alleged physical injuries from drinking contaminated water established a violation of their constitutional right to bodily integrity. The majority distinguished the case from previous bodily-integrity cases involving direct government actions such as forced medical procedures, involuntary medication and physical assault.

In addition, the court said city officials were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs could not identify controlling precedent or a broad consensus of cases clearly establishing a constitutional right to lead-free drinking water or truthful information from public officials about drinking water contamination.

The decision reversed the direction of an earlier Fifth Circuit panel ruling, which had found that the plaintiffs adequately alleged a violation of their right to bodily integrity. That panel decision was later vacated when the full Fifth Circuit agreed to rehear the case.

The ruling drew a dissent from several judges, who argued that the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged violations of their rights to bodily integrity and protection from state-created dangers. The dissent compared the allegations to the Flint water crisis and argued that the case should have been allowed to proceed to discovery.

While rejecting the federal constitutional claims, the majority emphasized that other avenues remain available to address drinking water contamination, including tort claims and enforcement under federal and state environmental laws. The court noted that state and federal agencies have taken actions in recent years to address Jackson's water quality challenges.