FOLLOW US

Justice Jackson highlighted that the fundamental issue with the compact is that while Colorado is obligated to send a certain amount of water to the New Mexico state line, New Mexico is only obligated to deliver a certain amount of water to the Elephant Butte dam and reservoir, a U.S. Bureau of Reclamation facility roughly 100 miles from the Texas border. Over the years, water users between Elephant Butte and the Texas state line have used increasing amounts of water, requiring the federal government to release more water from the reservoir to fulfill Texas' share under the compact.

Federal Obligations

The federal government is also obligated to deliver water to Mexico. The majority of justices said the United States' claims related to New Mexico's water use between Elephant Butte and Texas are not extinguished just because those two states and Colorado agreed on terms to resolve the dispute.

"The states contend that the United States has no valid compact claims because it does not itself receive an apportionment of water under the compact," Justice Jackson said. "But the United States did not receive an apportionment of Rio Grande water in 2018 any more than it does now."

Texas-NM Water Deal : Dissenting Opinion

In a dissent authored by Justice Neil Gorsuch, the minority argued that the states' agreement should be respected, as it would still preserve the federal government's rights to assert claims in separate litigation in federal district court.

"The court's decision is inconsistent with how original jurisdiction cases normally proceed," Justice Gorsuch said. "It defies 100 years of this court's water law jurisprudence and represents a serious assault on the power of states to govern the water rights of users in their jurisdictions."

Justice Gorsuch stated that the agreement is consistent with the compact's mandate that Texas receives a certain amount of Rio Grande water each year and does not impose any new "improper duty or obligation" on the federal government or deny it the ability to pursue any valid claim.

Legal Representation

The federal government is represented by Elizabeth B. Prelogar, Todd Kim, Edwin S. Kneedler, Frederick Liu, R. Lee Leininger, Judith E. Coleman, and Jennifer A. Najjar of the U.S. Department of Justice. Texas is represented by Ken Paxton, Brent Webster, Grant Dorfman, James Lloyd, Kellie E. Billings-Ray, Aaron L. Nielson, Lanora C. Pettit, and Beth Klusmann of the Texas Attorney General's Office and Stuart L. Somach, Theresa C. Barfield, and Sarah A. Klahn of Somach Simmons & Dunn PC. New Mexico and Colorado were represented at oral arguments by Jeffrey J. Wechsler of Montgomery & Andrews PA. New Mexico is also represented on the briefs by Raul Torrez, James Grayson, and Julie Ann Meade of the New Mexico Attorney General's Office, Shelly Dalrymple and Kaleb W. Brooks of Montgomery & Andrews PA, Bennett W. Raley, Lisa M. Thompson, and Michael A. Kopp of Trout Raley and John B. Draper and Corinne E. Atton of Draper & Draper LLC.