Legal Opinion
Arizona v. California
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 19, 2000No. 8 ORIGPublishedCited by 599 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Ginsburg
In the latest chapter of this long-litigated original-jurisdiction ease, the Queehan Tribe (Tribe) and the United States on the Tribe’s behalf assert claims for increased rights to water from the Colorado River. These claims are based on the contention that the Fort Yuma (Queehan) Indian Reservation encompasses some 25,000 acres of disputed boundary lands not attributed to that reservation in earlier stages of the litigation. In this decision, we resolve a threshold question regarding these claims to additional water rights: Are the claims precluded by this Court’s prior decision in Arizona…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Arizona v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Nevada v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Winters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- United States v. Sioux Nation of IndiansSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United States v. International Building Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by599 opinions
- Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. MuchnickSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Headwaters Inc., an Oregon Nonprofit Corporation Forest Conservation Council v. U.S. Forest ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2005
- Requena v. RobertsCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018
- Walters v. INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BANK OF CHINACourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- In Re: John W. Catt, Ii. Appeal Of: Shirley and Gerald HashCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
594 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.