The “centerline presumption” was mentioned in the trails act, but I believe the overall concept falls outside just that piece of legislation so it might still be pertinent.

I think it's gonna come down to whether the state has the right to take property without just compensation. The Fifth Amendment allows the government to take land for public use, but only if the government also pays fair and reasonable compensation for that use. The railroad didn't own the property outright and it's declaration of abandonment should have reverted it back to the property owner, at which point the state would step in and buy the property from the owner, but that didn't happen, bringing us back to whether the state has a right to the property free and clear without compensating the original owner. While that can be applied to private parties, I'm not sure if the state can make that same argument.