Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Lines In The Sand: Interstate Groundwater Disputes In The Supreme Court, Noah D. Hall, Joseph Regalia
Lines In The Sand: Interstate Groundwater Disputes In The Supreme Court, Noah D. Hall, Joseph Regalia
Scholarly Works
As states increasingly rely on groundwater to meet their freshwater demands, interstate conflicts have emerged across the country. This article discusses the two most prominent interstate groundwater disputes, one from the east and one from the west. The eastern case, Mississippi v. Tennessee, is the first interstate groundwater case before the Supreme Court and will set important precedent for future litigation. The western case, a dispute between Utah and Nevada, provides a promising alternative to litigation—an interstate compact that could serve as a model for cooperative management and protection of shared interstate aquifers.
Interstate Groundwater Law Revisited: Mississippi V. Tennessee, Noah D. Hall, Joseph Regalia
Interstate Groundwater Law Revisited: Mississippi V. Tennessee, Noah D. Hall, Joseph Regalia
Scholarly Works
In June 2015, the United States Supreme Court granted the State of Mississippi leave to file a bill of complaint against the State of Tennessee, the City of Memphis, and Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division for wrongfully converting groundwater from the interstate Sparta-Memphis Aquifer. The dispute arises from Memphis and its municipal utility pumping groundwater within Tennessee, which Mississippi alleges has lowered the water tables within its territory. The Supreme Court's grant of leave raises for the first time the question of what legal doctrine applies to transboundary interstate groundwater resources. Tennessee and lower courts would subject interstate groundwater …
Introduction To The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project, Linda L. Berger, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Bridget J. Crawford
Introduction To The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project, Linda L. Berger, Kathryn M. Stanchi, Bridget J. Crawford
Scholarly Works
The U.S. Feminist Judgments Project turns attention to the U.S. Supreme Court. Contributors to this volume challenge the formalistic concepts that U.S. Supreme Court opinions are, or should be, written from a neutral vantage point and that they are, or should be, based on deductive logic or “pure” rationality. When the project’s authors brought their own feminist consciousness or philosophy to some of the most important (and supposedly “neutral”) decisions and assertions about gender-related issues, the judicial decisions took on a very different character. Feminist consciousness broadens and widens the lens through which we view law and helps the decision …
The Institutionalization Of Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, Paul M. Collins Jr., Lori A. Ringhand
The Institutionalization Of Supreme Court Confirmation Hearings, Paul M. Collins Jr., Lori A. Ringhand
Scholarly Works
This article uses an original database of confirmation hearing dialogue to examine how the Senate Judiciary Committee’s role in Supreme Court confirmations has changed over time, with particular attention paid to the 1939–2010 era. During this period, several notable developments took place, including a rise in the number of hearing comments, increased attention to nominees’ views of judicial decisions, an expansion of the scope of issues addressed, and the equalization of questioning between majority and minority party senators. We demonstrate that these changes were shaped by both endogenous and exogenous factors to promote the legitimization of the Judiciary Committee’s role …