Skip to main content

War powers and state lawsuits

Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety

Updated Sep 19, 2026

In brief

The Court said Congress may authorize USERRA lawsuits seeking money from states, overturned the Texas ruling, and sent Torres's case back for further proceedings (reversed and remanded).

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 5-4 · June 29, 2022 · Opinion by Justice Breyer

What it’s about
This case was about whether a Texas state trooper who returned from military service with service-related lung injuries could sue his state employer under USERRA after the state refused to place him in a suitable job.
Who it affects
The ruling says Congress may authorize private lawsuits seeking money from states that do not agree to be sued when Congress uses its power to raise and support the Armed Forces. The lower court must now continue proceedings on Torres's individual claim.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The Court held that Congress can allow those suits against states because the states gave up that immunity when they joined the Union in matters tied to Congress’s war powers.

The case tested whether the Constitution's federal military powers can override states' usual protection from private lawsuits.

Question presented

Whether Congress has the power to authorize suits against nonconsenting states pursuant to its War Powers?

What the Court decided

Holding

By ratifying the Constitution, the States agreed their sovereignty would yield to the national power to raise and support the Armed Forces. Congress may exercise this power to authorize private damages suits against nonconsenting States, as in USERRA. 583 S. W. 3d 221, reversed and remanded.

Result
Reversed

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Dissented
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 5joined the Court's opinion
  1. Breyerwrote the opinion
  2. Kaganalso wrote separately
  3. Kavanaugh
  4. Sotomayor
  5. Roberts
Dissenting · 4disagreed with the result
  1. Barrett
  2. Thomaswrote the dissent
  3. Gorsuch
  4. Alito
5 justices joined the judgment, 4 dissented.

From the opinions

“Alden should have squarely foreclosed that holding.”

— Justice Thomas(dissent)

What's next

The Supreme Court sent the case back to the Texas courts for further proceedings (remanded). The decision itself does not set a money award for Torres.

Documents

3

Docket activity

11
  • New analysis added

    Sep 19, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Sep 19, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Sep 19, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis

    Sep 19, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary

    Sep 19, 2026 · Generated

Show 6 more
  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Sep 19, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Sep 3, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: status, opinion_date

    Jul 25, 2026 · Court records

  • Opinion added: opinion

    Jun 29, 2022 · Court records

  • Brief added: Petition

    Nov 2, 2020 · Court records

  • Brief added: Questions Presented

    Court records

More questions

4
What was Torres v. Texas Department of Public Safety about?
It asked whether Congress could let a Texas trooper sue Texas under USERRA after the state refused a suitable job following military service.
What action did the Supreme Court take in Torres?
It overturned the Texas appeals court's ruling and sent the case back for further proceedings (reversed and remanded).
How does the ruling affect USERRA suits against states?
It allows Congress to authorize private lawsuits seeking money from states that do not agree to be sued under USERRA.
What happens next in Torres's case?
The Texas courts will continue proceedings on his claim. This decision does not itself set a money award for Torres.

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Sep 19, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis