Case law is becoming an ever more unreliable basis for future determinations of either fairness or justice.
Because judicial courts do not determine “right” or “wrong”, they only designate what is either legal or illegal.
Case law, based on the old English law code, preceded the application of the standards of the US Constitution, and the framework of the Declaration of Independence. It has evolved since then to cover situations that may only exist in a certain set of circumstances, and in a given time period. As a result, case law has many contradictions and outright opposing precedents, which in the end, only succeed in enriching the legal profession.
And does not do a thing for their public perception.
Throughout the “Commonwealth Realm”, land that is not privately owned is called “Crown land”. No ambiguity there.
However, I’ve been told that the American colonies once had a revolution, and separated from the Empire. I’ve also been told that they went on to establish a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Based on that, it would seem to me (an observant foreigner) that your case law should have branched out from the British (and Canadian, etc.) case law, since that alleged revolution.
Rather than your government “owning” land — wouldn’t it be more accurate to say: “the people own this land in common, and we use our government to manage it on our behalf”.
“Case law”? I don’t believe that can be found in the US Constitution. It stipulates that “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.”
The land owners have a really strong case - of course it is Texas land, I’ve been paying Texas property taxes on it since before there was a BLM.