Arizona v. California

Last updated

Arizona v. California
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued March 9–10, 1931; Decided May 18, 1931
Argued April 2, 1934; Decided May 21, 1934
Argued April 28, 1936; Decided May 25, 1936
Argued January 8–11, 1962 (Reargued November 13–14, 1962); Decided June 3, 1963
Decreed March 9, 1964; amended February 28, 1966
Argued October 10, 1978; Decided January 9, 1979
Argued December 8, 1982; Decided March 30, 1983
Supplemental decree entered April 16, 1984
Argued June 19, 2000; Decided October 10, 2000
Full case nameState of Arizona v. State of California
Citations283 U.S. 423 (1931); 292 U.S. 341 (1934); 298 U.S. 558 (1936); 373 U.S. 546 (1963); 376 U.S. 340 (1964); 383 U.S. 268 (1966); 439 U.S. 419 (1979); 460 U.S. 605 (1983) 466 U.S. 144 (1984); 531 U.S. 1 (2000); 589 U.S. ____ (2020)
Prior historyOriginal Jurisdiction
ArgumentOral argument
Holding
California gets a maximum of 50% up to 4,400,000 acre-feet (5.4 km3) of Colorado River water a year or less according to certain formula; Nevada gets 4% and Arizona gets the remainder
Court membership
(1931)
Chief Justice
Charles E. Hughes
Associate Justices
Oliver W. Holmes Jr.  · Willis Van Devanter
James C. McReynolds  · Louis Brandeis
George Sutherland  · Pierce Butler
Harlan F. Stone  · Owen Roberts

(1934 and 1936)
Chief Justice
Charles E. Hughes
Associate Justices
Willis Van Devanter  · James C. McReynolds
Louis Brandeis  · George Sutherland
Pierce Butler  · Harlan F. Stone
Owen Roberts  · Benjamin N. Cardozo

(1963 and 1964)
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black  · William O. Douglas
Tom C. Clark  · John M. Harlan II
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Arthur Goldberg

(1966)
Chief Justice
Earl Warren
Associate Justices
Hugo Black  · William O. Douglas
Tom C. Clark  · John M. Harlan II
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Abe Fortas

(1979)
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun  · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist  · John P. Stevens

(1983 and 1984)
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · William Rehnquist
John P. Stevens  · Sandra Day O'Connor

(2000)
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens  · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia  · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter  · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg  · Stephen Breyer

Arizona v. California is a set of United States Supreme Court cases, all dealing with disputes over water distribution from the Colorado River between the states of Arizona and California. It also covers the amount of water that the State of Nevada receives from the river as well.

Contents

When a dispute arises between two states, the case is filed for original jurisdiction with the United States Supreme Court. This is one of the very limited circumstances where the Court has original jurisdiction; that is, as a trial court and no lower may hear the case. In all other cases, the Court acts as the highest level appellate court in the United States.

The cases involved were all named Arizona v. California, and were decided in 1931, 1934, 1936, 1963, 1964, 1966, 1979, 1983, 1984, and 2000.

The original decision, 283 U.S. 423 (1931), specified the amount of water to which Arizona was entitled under the Colorado River Compact of 1922.

Since then, the case has been relitigated several times because of Arizona's claims of California using more water than it is entitled.

The court determined that the Secretary of the Interior was not bound by Prior-appropriation water rights in allocating water among the states, within the 1964 decree. [1]

In summary, as long as at least 7,500,000 acre-feet (9.3 km3) of water is available from the Colorado River, California is allocated 4,400,000 acre⋅ft (5.4 km3); Nevada, 300,000 acre⋅ft (0.37 km3); and Arizona, the remainder. If more water is available, California is entitled to 50% of the water from the Colorado River, Arizona to 46%, and Nevada to 4%. If less water is available, the Secretary of the Interior must allocate the water according to various formulas (which were the subjects of the court cases) to ensure that each state receives a specified amount, with California receiving an absolute fixed maximum of 4,400,000 acre-feet (5.4 km3) per year (376 U.S. 342). [2] Some of the adjustments involved rights of the U.S. Government with respect to supplying water to Indian tribes pursuant to Executive Orders signed by the President of the United States as far back as 1907.

The 1962 oral arguments set a modern record for the Supreme Court: 16 hours over four days. [3]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colorado River</span> Major river in the western United States and Mexico

The Colorado River is one of the principal rivers in the Southwestern United States and in northern Mexico. The 1,450-mile-long (2,330 km) river, the 5th longest in the United States, drains an expansive, arid watershed that encompasses parts of seven U.S. states and two Mexican states. The name Colorado derives from the Spanish language for "colored reddish" due to its heavy silt load. Starting in the central Rocky Mountains of Colorado, it flows generally southwest across the Colorado Plateau and through the Grand Canyon before reaching Lake Mead on the Arizona–Nevada border, where it turns south toward the international border. After entering Mexico, the Colorado approaches the mostly dry Colorado River Delta at the tip of the Gulf of California between Baja California and Sonora.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Glen Canyon Dam</span> Dam in Arizona, USA

Glen Canyon Dam is a concrete arch-gravity dam in the southwestern United States, located on the Colorado River in northern Arizona, near the city of Page. The 710-foot-high (220 m) dam was built by the Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) from 1956 to 1966 and forms Lake Powell, one of the largest man-made reservoirs in the U.S. with a capacity of more than 25 million acre-feet (31 km3). The dam is named for Glen Canyon, a series of deep sandstone gorges now flooded by the reservoir; Lake Powell is named for John Wesley Powell, who in 1869 led the first expedition to traverse the Colorado River's Grand Canyon by boat.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lake Powell</span> Reservoir in Utah and Arizona, United States

Lake Powell is an artificial reservoir on the Colorado River in Utah and Arizona, United States. It is a major vacation destination visited by approximately two million people every year. It is the second largest artificial reservoir by maximum water capacity in the United States behind Lake Mead, storing 24,322,000 acre-feet (3.0001×1010 m3) of water when full. However, Lake Mead has fallen below Lake Powell in size several times during the 21st century in terms of volume of water, depth and surface area.

In the American legal system, prior appropriation water rights is the doctrine that the first person to take a quantity of water from a water source for "beneficial use" has the right to continue to use that quantity of water for that purpose. Subsequent users can take the remaining water for their own use if they do not impinge on the rights of previous users. The doctrine is sometimes summarized, "first in time, first in right".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colorado River Compact</span> US interstate water allocation agreement

The Colorado River Compact is a 1922 agreement that regulates water distribution among seven states in the southwestern United States. The contract is about the area within the drainage basin of the Colorado River.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Parker Dam</span> Colorado River dam between Arizona and California

Parker Dam is a concrete arch-gravity dam that crosses the Colorado River 155 miles (249 km) downstream of Hoover Dam. Built between 1934 and 1938 by the Bureau of Reclamation, it is 320 feet (98 m) high, 235 feet (72 m) of which are below the riverbed (the deep excavation was necessary in order to reach the bedrock on which the foundation of the dam was built), making it the deepest dam in the world. The portion of the dam above the foundation stands 85 feet (25.9 m) tall, making it the only dam in the world that stands more underground than above ground. The dam's primary functions are to create a reservoir, and to generate hydroelectric power. The reservoir behind the dam is called Lake Havasu and can store 647,000 acre⋅ft (798,000,000 m3; 2.11×1011 US gal; 1.76×1011 imp gal). The dam straddles the Arizona-California state border at the narrows the river passes through between the Whipple Mountains in San Bernardino County, California and the Buckskin Mountains in La Paz County, Arizona.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Boundary and Water Commission</span>

The International Boundary and Water Commission is an international body created by the United States and Mexico in 1889 to apply the rules for determining the location of their international boundary when meandering rivers transferred tracts of land from one bank to the other, as established under the Convention of November 12, 1884.

Kansas v. Colorado is a longstanding litigation before the Supreme Court of the United States between US states: Kansas and Colorado regarding the payment for the use of the Arkansas River. The Court has rendered numerous opinions on the case:

Wyoming v. Colorado, 259 U.S. 419 (1922) is a set of court cases, all dealing with water distribution from the Laramie River. A petition for rehearing was granted, which revised the original decision. A motion to dismiss was later denied.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Colorado River Storage Project</span> US Bureau of Reclamation project

The Colorado River Storage Project is a United States Bureau of Reclamation project designed to oversee the development of the upper basin of the Colorado River. The project provides hydroelectric power, flood control and water storage for participating states along the upper portion of the Colorado River and its major tributaries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water in California</span> Water supply and distribution in the U.S. state of California

California's interconnected water system serves almost 40 million people and irrigates over 5,680,000 acres (2,300,000 ha) of farmland. As the world's largest, most productive, and potentially most controversial water system, it manages over 40 million acre-feet (49 km3) of water per year. Use of available water averages 50% environmental, 40% agricultural and 10% urban, though this varies considerably by region and between wet and dry years. In wet years, "environmental" water averages 61%, while in dry years it averages 41%, and can be even lower in critically dry years.

Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564 (1908), was a United States Supreme Court case clarifying water rights of American Indian reservations. This doctrine was meant to clearly define the water rights of indigenous people in cases where the rights were not clear. The case was first argued on October 24, 1907, and a decision was reached January 6, 1908. This case set the standards for the United States government to acknowledge the vitality of indigenous water rights, and how rights to the water relate to the continuing survival and self-sufficiency of indigenous people.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Klamath Diversion</span>

The Klamath Diversion was a federal water project proposed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation in the 1950s. It would have diverted the Klamath River in Northern California to the more arid central and southern parts of that state. It would relieve irrigation water demand and groundwater overdraft in the Central Valley and boost the water supply for Southern California. Through the latter it would allow for other Southwestern states—Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah—as well as Mexico to receive an increased share of the waters of the Colorado River.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water law in the United States</span>

Water law in the United States refers to the Water resources law laws regulating water as a resource in the United States. Beyond issues common to all jurisdictions attempting to regulate water's uses, water law in the United States must contend with:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Water in Colorado</span> State of Colorado water use and rights

Water in Colorado is of significant importance, as the American state of Colorado is the 7th-driest state in America. As result, water rights generate conflict, with many water lawyers in the state.

Virginia v. Maryland, 540 U.S. 56 (2003), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States settled a dispute between the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State of Maryland regarding Virginia's riparian rights to the Potomac River. The Supreme Court held in a 7—2 decision that Maryland has no legal authority to regulate or prohibit Virginia and its political subdivisions from building and improving structures in the river and from drawing water from the river. The decision drew heavily on the Maryland–Virginia Compact of 1785, an agreement between the two states concerning navigational and riparian water rights along the Potomac River.

The Montana Water Court is a court of law in the U.S. state of Montana which has jurisdiction over the adjudication of water rights. The filing, verification, recording, and enforcement of water rights in the Montana Territory and, later, the state of Montana were considered highly inadequate until 1972, when a new state constitution required a more robust, highly centralized water rights legal system. Implementation of this system led to the establishment of the Water Court in 1979, after six years of mixed success with an administrative solution. The Water Court consists of a Chief Water Judge, Associate Water Judge, and four District Water Judges, but most work is handled by special masters. The process of identifying, verifying, and adjudicating water rights is a complex one, and budgetary and personnel issues have slowed the work at times. Appeals from the Water Court are made directly to the Montana Supreme Court.

Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado, 583 U.S. ___ (2018), was a Supreme Court case argued and decided during the 2017 term of the Supreme Court of the United States. The case involved an interstate dispute regarding New Mexico's compliance with the Rio Grande Compact of 1938, an agreement which established a plan for equitable apportionment of the water in the Rio Grande Basin among the states of Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. The Court considered the question of whether the U.S. federal government had a legal right to join litigation against New Mexico; the Court ruled that the federal government was within its rights when it did so.

Texas v. New Mexico, 592 U.S. ___ (2020), is a long-running United States Supreme Court case between the U.S. states of Texas and New Mexico regarding the Pecos River Compact. It was decided on December 14, 2020.

References

  1. "Arizona". www.usbr.gov. Retrieved September 22, 2021.
  2. "(3) If insufficient mainstream water is available for release, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, to satisfy annual consumptive use of 7,500,000 acre-feet in the aforesaid three States, then the Secretary of the Interior... may apportion the amount remaining available... but in no event shall more than 4,400,000 acre-feet be apportioned for use in California..." 376 U.S. 440, 442
  3. "Multi-hour arguments heard at Supreme Court - 24 Hour National News - The Buffalo News". Archived from the original on March 30, 2012.