Citation network
California Vs. United States
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jul 03, 1978
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
California v. UnitedSearch
-
States - 438 U.S. 645 (1978) U.S. Supreme Court California v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 438 U.S. 645 (1978) California v. UnitedSearch
-
prevented by dicta that may Page 438 U. S. 646 point to a contrary conclusion in Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
-
U. S. 275 , City of Fresno v. CaliforniaSearch
-
U. S. 627 , and Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
were quite different from the climate and topography of the Pacific Coast States. As noted in both United States v. GerlachSearch
-
Live Stock Co., 339 U. S. 725 (1950), and Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
its language. Indeed, so far as we can tell, the first case to come to this Court involving the Act at all was Ickes v. FoxSearch
-
of the Act was United States v. GerlachSearch
-
many of the Western States had been admitted to the Union, Congress deferred to the growing local law. Thus, in Broder v. WaterSearch
-
pp. 895 (2d ed.1908). Thus, in Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
into the Union, they were admitted with the full powers of local sovereignty which belonged to other States, Pollard v. HaganSearch
-
Id. at 206 U. S. 92 and 206 U. S. 95 . And see United States v. RioSearch
-
United States v. RioSearch
-
Wall. 670, 87 U. S. 684 (1875). See Broder v. WaterSearch
-
added). This Court has had an opportunity to construe the 1877 Desert Land Act before. In California Oregon Power Co. v. BeaverSearch
-
in respect of riparian rights should obtain. For since 'Congress cannot enforce either rule upon any state,' Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
and seeks to remove what otherwise might be an impediment to its full and successful operation. See Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
Id. at 295 U. S. 163 -164. See also Gutierres v. AlbuquerqueSearch
-
exceptions not relevant to reclamation, authority over intrastate waterways lies with the States. In United States v. RioSearch
-
Id. at 174 U. S. 709 . Page 438 U. S. 663 Similarly, in Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
to the Secretary of the Interior as to the operation of federal reclamation projects. In Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
-
U.S. at 357 U. S. 291 -292. Five years later, in City of Fresno v. CaliforniaSearch
-
dictum was repeated in City of Fresno, supra at 372 U. S. 630 , and in this Court's opinion in Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
water to follow priorities laid down by state law has already been disposed of by this Court in Ivanhoe Irrig. Dist. v. McCrackenSearch
-
and reaffirmed in City of Fresno v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Page 438 U. S. 674 In Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
with congressional directive. In holding that the United States was not an indispensable party in Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
Id. at 295 U. S. 42 -43. Ten years later, in its final decision in Nebraska v. WyomingSearch
-
according to the pattern of state law as provided in the Reclamation Act. We can say here what was said in Ickes v. FoxSearch
-
S.Rep. No. 755, 82d Cong., 1st Sess., 3, 6 (1951). v. BecauseSearch
-
Section 8 of the 1902 Reclamation Act has been mentioned in only seven cases decided by this Court. See Ide v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. GerlachSearch
-
Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
-
Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
States gained absolute dominion over their nonnavigable waters upon their admission to the Union. See, e.g., Stockman v. LeddySearch
-
Farm Investment Co. v. CarpenterSearch
-
California Oregon Power Co. v. BeaverSearch
-
water if inconsistent with other congressional directives to the Secretary. See Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court California v. UnitedSearch
-
and Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
and Ivanhoe Irrigation District v. McCrackenSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial