Citation network
Texas Vs. New Mexico
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 17, 1983
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
-
Texas v. NewSearch
-
Mexico - 462 U.S. 554 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. NewSearch
-
Mexico, 462 U.S. 554 (1983) Texas v. NewSearch
-
See Pennsylvania v. WheelingSearch
-
may vest a federal official with the responsibility to administer the division of interstate streams. See Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
the division of interstate waters on a day-to-day basis, even with the consent of the States involved. E.g., Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Wisconsin v. IllinoisSearch
-
test the limits of proper judicial functions, and we have thought it wise not to undertake such a project. Vermont v. NewSearch
-
framed suit to apportion the waters of an interstate stream between States through which it flows, e.g., Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
U. S. 125 , 185 U. S. 145 (1902), or to a suit to enforce a prior apportionment, e.g., Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
to a suit by one State to enforce its compact with another State or to declare rights under a compact. Virginia v. WestSearch
-
Dyer v. SimsSearch
-
Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. at 373 U. S. 565 -566. Nevertheless, as Virginia v. WestSearch
-
judicial relief when the compact does not provide an equivalent method of vindicating the State's rights. Cf. Green v. BiddleSearch
-
an original forum in this Court for particular disputes within our constitutional original jurisdiction. See Maryland v. LouisianaSearch
-
Ohio v. WyandotteSearch
-
Massachusetts v. MissouriSearch
-
New York v. NewSearch
-
Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Minnesota v. WisconsinSearch
-
Arts. v. andSearch
-
to appoint a commission with broad powers to resolve factual questions in a controversy between two States, see Iowa v. IllinoisSearch
-
declined to accept the commission's decisions without providing the States an opportunity to challenge them, see Iowa v. IllinoisSearch
-
We have, however, been willing to appoint a River Master solely to perform ministerial tasks. New Jersey v. NewSearch
-
litigation of such disputes is obviously a poor alternative to negotiation between the interested States. See Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Cf. Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
In Green v. BiddleSearch
-
Cf. Illinois v. MilwaukeeSearch
-
States of such seriousness that it would amount to casus belli if the States were fully sovereign. North Dakota v. MinnesotaSearch
-
Missouri v. IllinoisSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. NewSearch
-
See Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
E.g., Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Virginia v. WestSearch
-
Dyer v. SimsSearch
-
Cf. Green v. BiddleSearch
-
See Maryland v. LouisianaSearch
-
Arts. v. andSearch
-
New Jersey v. NewSearch
-
States. See Vermont v. NewSearch
-
Washington v. OregonSearch
-
Kansas v. ColoradoSearch
-
Wyoming v. ColoradoSearch
-
Iowa v. IllinoisSearch
-
North Dakota v. MinnesotaSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial