FOLLOW US

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled that Texas, New Mexico, and Colorado improperly excluded the federal government from an agreement that resolved a Rio Grande water sharing dispute, rejecting the states' argument that the conflict was theirs alone to settle.

In a 5-4 decision, the justices sided with the federal government, which argued that the states' 2022 consent decree impacted its interests in providing water to Mexico and two local districts in New Mexico and Texas. Because the government was not a party to the final resolution, its interests were not adequately represented, and the consent decree must be renegotiated, the majority said.

Texas-NM Water Deal : Federal Interests Ignored

Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, writing for the majority, explained that the proposed consent decree violates the high court's ruling in 1986's Firefighters v. Cleveland, which held that parties resolving litigation through settlement cannot dismiss a third party's claims. This decision impacts the Texas-NM water deal, emphasizing the importance of including the federal government in such agreements.

The dispute originated in 2013 when Texas accused New Mexico of violating the 1938 Rio Grande Compact by illegally diverting water connected to the river downstream from the Elephant Butte Reservoir, where water levels were measured, resulting in Texas losing tens of thousands of gallons from its share. Texas filed its complaint directly with the high court, and in 2018, the justices allowed the federal government to intervene on Texas' side.

Consent Decree Rejected

"The United States still advances the same claims as it did in 2018, backed by the same unique federal interests we identified then," Justice Jackson said. "Through the consent decree, the states would settle all parties' compact claims and, in the process, cut off the United States' requested relief as to New Mexican groundwater pumping. Because our precedent does not permit that result, the states' motion to enter the consent decree is denied."

The three compact states finalized a consent decree in 2022, agreeing to measure the water entering Texas at a new point near the New Mexico-Texas state line. However, the federal government opposed the deal, arguing that while the high court's precedent typically does not allow an intervening party like itself to block a consent decree, the rules change when a proposed decree settles the intervenor's claims without its agreement.

Texas-NM Water Deal : Special Master and Dissent

The special master picked by the high court to oversee the matter, Judge Michael J. Melloy of the Eighth Circuit, recommended that the justices sign off on the states' deal, saying the federal government's concerns were substantially similar to those raised by Texas and that Texas' satisfaction negated the need for the federal government's approval.