[a12k]

Texas is just a much better and cheaper option. It retains the upsides of sea launches (being able to select location, being far from people) without the downsides (being out in the water vs landlocked). They can also take advantage of US infrastructure and legal stability, which are downsides noted in the article about equatorial locations, while retaining the upsides of those areas in the form of not needing to worry about pollution, and very malleable state laws. Basically Texas is as good as it gets if you’re amoral and running a company with large externalities.

[cubefox]

I think Texas is currently used for testing purposes while the main Starship launch site will be in Kennedy Space Center, Florida. It's currently being built.

Still, that's not a new fact, so there must have been a reason why they first thought offshore space ports were a valuable addition and then later changed their mind.

[jltsiren]

One upside of sea launches is the ability to choose any heading, which makes reaching the desired orbit easier. When launching from land, you have a limited range of possible headings, unless you are willing to launch over populated areas.

For example, rockets launched from Florida to ISS initially head northeast. A similar launch from Boca Chica would place the trajectory uncomfortably close to Houston.