When Gov. Mary Fallin and Texas Gov. Rick Perry in January agreed a north Texas water district could take water out of the Red River using a pump station in Oklahoma, they avoided what could’ve been a long legal battle over the exact location of the state’s southern boundary.
Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund Director of Litigation Nina Perales (from left), MALDEF lawyer Luis Figueroa, Georgetown University law professor Jon Greenbaum and San Carlos Apache Tribal Chairman Terry Rambler talk with reporters outside the U.S. Supreme Court after attending oral arguments in <em>Arizona v. Inter Tribal Council et al</em>. in March.
Originally published on Mon June 17, 2013 11:55 am
The Supreme Court is looking to make the final stretch of the 2012 term a dramatic one: While the justices knocked out five opinions today, none of them were the major ones we've been looking forward to. As we've told you before, we're waiting for:
On Tuesday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Tarrant v. Herrmann, an Oklahoma-Texas water fight with national implications.
The justices grappled with the 30-year-old Red River Compact, and whether a region of Texas can reach across state lines to access water in southeastern Oklahoma.
The two states have different interpretations of some language in the agreement. The compact gives Oklahoma and Texas “equal rights” to some of the water in southeastern Oklahoma. But “equal rights” means different things to each state.