article: This case arose from the Flint water crisis, a public health emergency in which the city of Flint, Michigan supplied water that contained elevated levels of lead to the public. On April 6, 2016, fifteen residents of Flint, Michigan filed this class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sued the Governor of Michigan, his chief of staff, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), several other government agencies, the City of Flint, and three corporations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (18 U.S.C § 1964), and state law. The plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, alleged that defendants’ involvement in the supply of lead-contaminated drinking water violated their Fourteenth Amendment Due Process and Equal Protection rights, RICO, and state law. Flint had purchased water from the high quality Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD) for roughly half a century before the crisis. But in 2014, led by an Emergency Manager, Flint switched its water source to the Flint River as a way to address the city’s financial problems. The plaintiffs alleged that, because the Flint River was only a temporary solution until the City could be connected to the Karegnondi Water Authority, the state knew that the Flint River was low quality even before connecting the City to the source. The plaintiffs claimed that by continuing to charge the residents of Flint the same amount for water despite the significantly lower quality, the defendants were fraudulently engaged in a RICO scheme by selling unsafe water. Specifically, the plaintiffs claimed that this deprived them of both contractually guaranteed property and bodily integrity rights protected under a substantive due process framework. Further, the plaintiffs alleged that their Fourteenth Amendment right to Equal Protection was violated because the switch from the DWSD to the Flint River was motivated by racism. The plaintiffs’ evidence of racial discrimination was the fact that, of the six municipalities that bought water from DWSD through which the Flint River flowed, only the predominantly Black City of Flint was switched to the Flint River source. Because this case appeared to be a companion case to <i>Mays v. Snyder</i> (Case No. 15-14002), on April 20, 2016, this case was reassigned to District Judge John Corbertt O’Meara and Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub in Ann Arbor. On June 30, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, adding a jury demand and several additional defendants in their official capacities at all times relevant to the complaint, some of which included the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), the former treasurer of the State of Michigan, all four emergency managers assigned to the city of Flint, the elected mayor of the City of Flint, and the directors and managers of several city and state health programs and water treatment plants. Another amended complaint was filed by the plaintiffs on August 12, 2016. On October 6, 2016, the State of Michigan, the Governor, MDEQ, MDHHS, and several individual government employees being sued in their official capacity filed a motion to dismiss. Another group of defendants—the Emergency Managers and City Officials of the City of Flint named in their official capacity as defendants in the suit—also filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ second amended complaint for similar reasoning as the other defendants. Additional motions to dismiss were filed on October 21st, 28th, and 31st. Although filed separately, all of the motions argued primarily the same reasons for dismissing the plaintiffs’ suit: the state defendants were entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity and the Court had already declared that the only federal remedy available for the plaintiffs’ grievances is the Safe Drinking Water Act. Meanwhile, two cases with similar claims had recently been decided and were consolidated on appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit: <a href=https://clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=17168><i>Mays v. Snyder</i></a> (Case No. 15-14002) and <i>Boler v. Earley</i> (Case No. 16-10323). On April 18, 2017, the parties in this case stipulated, and Judge John Corbett O’Meara granted, a stay on all aspects of this case, pending the consolidated appeals of these two cases. On July 27, 2017, this case, along with seven other cases litigating the Flint Water Crisis, were consolidated with <a href="https://www.clearinghouse.net/detail.php?id=16508"><i>Waid v. Snyder</i></a>, PB-MI-0014 in this Clearinghouse. All motions pending in this case were denied without prejudice. See the Clearinghouse record for <i>Waid</i> for all subsequent litigation.
summary: On April 6, 2016, fifteen residents of Flint, Michigan filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The plaintiffs sued the Governor of Michigan, his chief of staff, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), several other government agencies, the City of Flint, and three corporations under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, RICO, and state law. In particular, the plaintiffs alleged that their Fourteenth Amendment rights to Equal Protection and Due Process were violated when the State of Michigan and the City of Flint switched the City's water source from Detroit to the Flint River. Because several cases with similar claims were filed throughout the state, this case was ultimately consolidated with <i>Waid v. Snyder</i> on July 27, 2017.