Texas Supreme Court Tells Cities: Stop Ignoring State Law on Extraterritorial Jurisdictions (ETJs)

What the Elliott v. College Station Case Means for Property Owners After Senate Bill 2038

In a major development for Texas landowners, the Texas Supreme Court recently weighed in on how cities must handle requests from property owners who want to leave a city's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ)—a controversial area of law that affects thousands across the state.

The case, Elliott v. City of College Station, didn’t directly decide whether the new state law—Senate Bill 2038—is constitutional. But it sent a clear message: cities cannot simply ignore it.

What is Senate Bill 2038?

Senate Bill 2038 (passed in May 2023) gives landowners a clear legal right to remove their property from a city’s ETJ. For years, cities used ETJs to regulate property just outside city limits—even though the people living there couldn’t vote in city elections. This law aimed to end that practice by giving landowners an exit strategy.

Here’s how it works:

• If a majority of landowners in a defined area sign a petition for release, the city must release the area from its ETJ.

• The law is mandatory: cities don’t get a say. The petition is “a matter of paperwork, not permission.”

How Have Cities Responded?

Many Texas cities opposed the law and filed lawsuits challenging its constitutionality. At the same time, they’ve continued to deny or ignore landowners’ petitions—even though the law is currently in effect and presumed valid.

What Happened in Elliott v. College Station?

In the Elliott case, landowners had long been battling College Station’s attempts to regulate signs and driveways in the ETJ. After Senate Bill 2038 passed, they should’ve been able to petition for removal and end the fight. But College Station made clear that such a petition would be useless—it had already denied multiple petitions and adopted ordinances blocking release.

So the case went all the way to the Texas Supreme Court.

While the Court didn’t rule directly on SB 2038, it told the landowners they should first try the new petition process. In doing so, the Court effectively said:

• Senate Bill 2038 is the law, and it is presumed constitutional.

• A city cannot deny a valid petition under this law.

• Cities arguing that other laws still require their consent are wrong—that system no longer exists.

What Does This Mean for Landowners?

If you submitted a valid petition to remove your property from an ETJ and the city denied it, that denial is legally meaningless. As far as the law is concerned, your property is no longer in the ETJ.

And if a city continues to defy the law by denying valid petitions, it may be liable for your attorneys’ fees. The Texas Supreme Court’s message is clear: cities cannot ignore the law simply because they disagree with it.

At Cobb & Johns, we’re ready to help landowners enforce their rights under Senate Bill 2038—and hold cities accountable when they overstep.