Landmark Cancer Alley Racism Suit Faces Second Bid for Dismissal

A Louisiana parish is getting a second shot on Wednesday to argue for dismissal of a lawsuit centered around the petrochemical corridor known as Cancer Alley, a case that could bring novel environmental discrimination claims to trial.

St. James Parish will square off against residents and advocates Inclusive Louisiana, Mt. Triumph Baptist Church, and RISE St. James at the US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Their case targets a 2014 parish land use plan, amended in 2018, that plaintiffs claim violates discrimination and equal protection laws by designating parts of two majority Black districts as “industrial” or “future industrial.”

This is an important case, because it shows that “environmental discrimination claims are not just reserved for environmental permitting disputes” anymore, according to King & Spalding partner Doug Henderson.

The stakes are high. Communities that fought specific project permit approvals had some support on the federal level under the Biden administration. But the second Trump administration has worked to strip away the consideration of environmental justice in the permitting process.

“That a federal court will now consider proof issues related to EJ and environmental discrimination claims makes it a case to be watched closely,” Henderson said in an email.

St. James Parish is located in an 85-mile stretch of land along the Mississippi River that is lined with a vast array of heavy industry, from chemical plants to petrochemical parks. Residents have fought for years to stem industry expansion in the region, which is plagued by some of the highest cancer rates in the US.

District Judge Carl J. Barbier initially ruled in favor of the parish and dismissed the advocates’ case in November 2023. However, he was overruled by the conservative-leaning US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in April 2025. St. James Parish tried petitioning the US Supreme Court to weigh in, but it was denied in October 2025.

Barbier will now weigh the parish’s second attempt to toss the case Wednesday.

The parish’s decision to motion for another dismissal on standing is a “disappointing” move, according to RISE St. James chief operating officer Shamell Lavigne.

“We’re still being harmed by industry, and by the parish allowing industry to come in and even for the existing industry to expand,” Lavigne said. “We still stand by the merits of our case.”

Historic Harms

Plaintiffs claim the parish’s 2014 land use policy is a part of the “deep and lasting harms of slavery and its afterlife,” and it violates residents’ Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

That land use plan steers heavy industry away from White neighborhoods and into predominantly Black areas, as well as granting two-mile buffer zones for tourist plantations and Catholic churches, without doing so for Black communities, according to the complaint.

St. James Parish initially succeeded in their rebuttal at district court, lambasting what they called “irrelevant and inflammatory statements.”

The parish argues the area’s long history of the disenfranchisement of Black residents is only included for “the sake of sensationalizing this judicial proceeding and to prejudice St. James Parish by attempting to superimpose the atrocities of history onto unrelated modern actions.”

Plaintiffs’ amended complaint “lacks allegations that the elected officials who unanimously adopted the Land Use Plan and made decisions pursuant to that plan were motivated by the discriminatory intent necessary to sustain those claims,” according to the parish’s Nov. 18 motion to dismiss.

The Fifth Circuit’s ruling that plaintiffs did have the right to bring the case is “a first big step” Henderson noted. But Wednesday’s arguments are the beginning of a potentially steep road ahead. Proving intentional discrimination is often a high legal bar.

“Going forward, the proof necessary for Plaintiffs to prove their Constitutional and statutory discrimination claims will be a significant hurdle,” he said.

Ashta Sharma Pokharel of the Center for Constitutional Rights and Isabelle Adoue of the Environmental Law Clinic at Tulane University will argue on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Breazeale, Sachse & Wilson LLP represents the parish.

The case is Inclusive La. v. St. James Parish, E.D. La., No. 2:23-cv-00987, Arguments 1/28/26.