Is Anyone Criminally Liable for the Deadly Texas Floods?

Former Westchester County DA outlines possible criminal charges

(Photo by RONALDO SCHEMIDT/AFP via Getty Images)

The absolutely devastating floods that swept Hill Country, Texas in the early morning of July 4th killed at least 132 people, including 36 children, and more remain missing. While any natural disaster that claims lives is a tragedy, this rings especially true here in part because of the loss of so many young children at a place that was supposed to be their safe haven and happy place – Camp Mystic sleep away camp on the banks of the Guadalupe River. As is the case whenever a disaster – natural or man-made – strikes, the instinct arises to demand answers of “how” and “why” it happened and could the loss of life have been minimized. With images and stories pouring out of teenage counselors forced to make split-second, life or death decisions, and young girls terrified and trapped, it is especially tempting to ask these questions and, yes, whether anyone can and should be held responsible.

While civil lawsuits tend to be more common in these types of situations, criminal prosecutions by local authorities have been attempted — though the varied results highlight the significant challenges. As far back as 1911, the owners of the Triangle Shirt Factory were charged by the district attorney with manslaughter for a fire in which 146 women died because they were unable to escape locked doors. The factory owners were acquitted. The owners of St. Rita’s Nursing Home in Louisiana were charged by a local prosecutor with negligent homicide for failing to evacuate residents during Hurricane Katrina and 35 elderly residents died. They too were acquitted. Property owners in the 2016 Ghost Ship Warehouse Fire were charged with involuntary manslaughter when 36 people died in a fire during a concert in an unpermitted warehouse turned artists’ space. The main defendant, Derrick Alemena, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment. Similarly, after the shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde Texas in 2022, the former Schools Police Chief was indicted by the district attorney and a judge has refused to dismiss the charges. And a jury acquitted School Resource Officer Scot Peterson of child neglect, negligence and perjury for failing to act at the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018.

In the July 4th Texas flood tragedy, there are serious questions about the speed and scope of the response by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), as well as local emergency responses. There have also been claims that state officials had turned down requests from certain counties for enhanced warning systems, failures by county officials to pass an emergency warning system, and missed opportunities to prepare for this kind of storm. County Officials have been accused of not acting quickly enough to institute evacuation orders. There have also been some reports that the camp’s owner, Dick Eastland, who himself died trying to rescue the youngest campers, pushed for greater flood safety measures in the area of Camp Mystic, but also that he had tried to loosen regulations and did not take seriously enough the impending threat in an area where cabins were built on “flash flood alley.” Perhaps most devastating, many have pointed out that the one-hour delay between the warning received by the camp director and the start of evacuation was far too long.

The above cases show that criminal prosecution is rare and tenuous, but possible, especially when warnings were ignored, safety rules flouted, and leaders failed to act on clear duties. In the Texas flood context, similar charges (e.g., criminal negligence, negligent homicide, child neglect, involuntary manslaughter) could be considered under Texas law if an investigation reveals that individuals or entities knew or should have known of the risk posed by the floods and failed to take reasonable action to prevent harm. If a party had clear responsibility (like Camp Mystic leadership), received official warnings, and still failed to act, then criminal charges like criminal negligence or manslaughter could be considered. Similarly, Texas Emergency Management law outlines statutory responsibilities for disaster preparedness but does not directly define criminal liability for deaths. Prosecutors could pursue criminal negligence or wrongful death charges if they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that authorities ignored or delayed acting on known flood risks—especially if past warnings or engineering assessments indicated the need for a flood alert system, which Kerr County had sought but not implemented. Broader federal civil rights claims are also possible when government inaction leads to deaths under the constitutional right to due process.

To be clear, criminal prosecutions of this type are extremely hard to prove, extremely fact dependent (and we do not nearly know all of the facts now), and would likely require cooperating witnesses who themselves have to admit some responsibility. And prosecution would require proof beyond a reasonable doubt that an individual’s conduct amounted to gross deviation from the standard of care. As a public policy matter, it becomes incredibly difficult to draw lines between horrible natural disasters and perhaps bad policy versus criminal negligence or misconduct. However, it is troubling that county officials seem to be avoiding public appearances, reinforcing the argument that without accountability no meaningful changes will be made and therefore more lives will be lost. Is there a predicate for a grand jury investigation by the district attorney? If I were a local prosecutor in this area of Texas, I would absolutely use the power of the grand jury to explore whether criminal liability is appropriate, given some of the red flags and the immense loss of young lives here. Devastation on this scale demands accountability.