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.
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 name
State of Arizona v. State of California
Citations
283 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 history
Original Jurisdiction
Argument
Oral 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
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, 283U.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.[1]
292U.S. 341 (1934): Arizona argued that the Colorado River Compact was unconstitutional.
298U.S. 558 (1936): Arizona requested that the Supreme Court:
specify an amount of Colorado River water for Arizona's use
limit the amount allotted to California
373U.S. 546 (1963): The court specified the amount of water to which each state in the Colorado River Compact was entitled.
376U.S. 340 (1964): The court adjusted the amounts of water specified in 373 US 546.
383U.S. 268 (1966): The court adjusted its previous decree.
439U.S. 419 (1979): The court adjusted the specified amounts of water for all parties to the case.
460U.S. 605 (1983): The court issued a decree regarding unadjudicated rights of Indian tribes to Colorado River water.
466U.S. 144 (1984): The court adjusted its previous decree.
531U.S. 1 (2000): The court adjusted the specified amounts of water for several parties to the case.
547U.S. 150 (2006): The court approved a consolidated decree.
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]
^"Arizona". www.usbr.gov. Retrieved September 22, 2021.
^"(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
arizona, california, united, states, supreme, court, cases, dealing, with, disputes, over, water, distribution, from, colorado, river, between, states, arizona, california, also, covers, amount, water, that, state, nevada, receives, from, river, well, supreme,. 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 Arizona v CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued March 9 10 1931 Decided May 18 1931Argued April 2 1934 Decided May 21 1934Argued April 28 1936 Decided May 25 1936Argued January 8 11 1962 Reargued November 13 14 1962 Decided June 3 1963Decreed March 9 1964 amended February 28 1966Argued October 10 1978 Decided January 9 1979Argued December 8 1982 Decided March 30 1983Supplemental decree entered April 16 1984Argued June 19 2000 Decided October 10 2000Full case nameState of Arizona v State of CaliforniaCitations283 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 JurisdictionArgumentOral argumentHoldingCalifornia 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 remainderCourt membership 1931 Chief Justice Charles E Hughes Associate Justices Oliver W Holmes Jr Willis Van DevanterJames C McReynolds Louis BrandeisGeorge Sutherland Pierce ButlerHarlan F Stone Owen Roberts 1934 and 1936 Chief Justice Charles E Hughes Associate Justices Willis Van Devanter James C McReynoldsLouis Brandeis George SutherlandPierce Butler Harlan F StoneOwen Roberts Benjamin N Cardozo 1963 and 1964 Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black William O DouglasTom C Clark John M Harlan IIWilliam J Brennan Jr Potter StewartByron White Arthur Goldberg 1966 Chief Justice Earl Warren Associate Justices Hugo Black William O DouglasTom C Clark John M Harlan IIWilliam J Brennan Jr Potter StewartByron White Abe Fortas 1979 Chief Justice Warren E Burger Associate Justices William J Brennan Jr Potter StewartByron White Thurgood MarshallHarry 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 WhiteThurgood Marshall Harry BlackmunLewis F Powell Jr William RehnquistJohn P Stevens Sandra Day O Connor 2000 Chief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P Stevens Sandra Day O ConnorAntonin Scalia Anthony KennedyDavid Souter Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerWhen 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 1 292 U S 341 1934 Arizona argued that the Colorado River Compact was unconstitutional 298 U S 558 1936 Arizona requested that the Supreme Court specify an amount of Colorado River water for Arizona s use limit the amount allotted to California 373 U S 546 1963 The court specified the amount of water to which each state in the Colorado River Compact was entitled 376 U S 340 1964 The court adjusted the amounts of water specified in 373 US 546 383 U S 268 1966 The court adjusted its previous decree 439 U S 419 1979 The court adjusted the specified amounts of water for all parties to the case 460 U S 605 1983 The court issued a decree regarding unadjudicated rights of Indian tribes to Colorado River water 466 U S 144 1984 The court adjusted its previous decree 531 U S 1 2000 The court adjusted the specified amounts of water for several parties to the case 547 U S 150 2006 The court approved a consolidated decree 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 editWyoming v Colorado 1922 Florida v Georgia 2018 List of United States Supreme Court cases volume 283 volume 292 volume 298 volume 373 volume 376 volume 383 volume 439 volume 460 volume 466 volume 531 List of United States Supreme Court cases Lists of United States Supreme Court cases by volumeReferences edit Arizona www usbr gov Retrieved September 22 2021 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 Multi hour arguments heard at Supreme Court 24 Hour National News The Buffalo News Archived from the original on March 30 2012 External links editLawrence Pratt Collection Concerning Arizona v California and the Colorado River Yale Collection of Western Americana Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Arizona v California amp oldid 1175138552, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,
