Skip to content
Try for free
Back to judgment

Citation network

Texas Vs. New Mexico

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Jun 08, 1987

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

33 entries 1 linked 32 unlinked
Show
  1. Haffner Vs. Dobrinski US Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1910
  2. Texas v. New
    Search
  3. Mexico - 482 U.S. 124 (1987) U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. New
    Search
  4. Mexico, 482 U.S. 124 (1987) Texas v. New
    Search
  5. Petty v. Tennessee-Missouri
    Search
  6. remains a legal document that must be construed and applied in accordance with its terms. West Virginia ex rel. Dyer v. Sims
    Search
  7. the Constitution, the States gave this Court complete judicial power to adjudicate disputes among them, Rhode Island v. Massachusetts
    Search
  8. The Court has recognized the propriety of money judgments against a State in an original action, South Dakota v. North
    Search
  9. United States v. Michigan
    Search
  10. and specifically in a case involving a compact, Virginia v. West
    Search
  11. Eleventh Amendment is no barrier, for, by its terms, it applies only to suits by citizens against a State. Maryland v. Louisiana
    Search
  12. United States v. Mississippi
    Search
  13. South Dakota v. North
    Search
  14. Virginia v. West
    Search
  15. Wes1ey v. Eells
    Search
  16. original actions like this provides us with ample authority to appoint a master and to enforce our judgment. Virginia v. West
    Search
  17. we have taken a distinctly jaundiced view of appointing an agent or functionary to implement our decrees. Vermont v. New
    Search
  18. at 417 U. S. 275 -276, that solution, or a like one, has been employed when the occasion demands. New Jersey v. New
    Search
  19. Wisconsin v. Illinois
    Search
  20. of the Compact was of such general public interest that the sovereign State was a proper plaintiff. See Maryland v. Louisiana
    Search
  21. if not delivered as ordered by the Court, would entitle Texas to apply to this Court for enforcement, cf. Wyoming v. Colorado
    Search
  22. form, and that we are therefore without power to do so in this original action. It relies on the statement in Pierce v. United
    Search
  23. absent statutory authority. But we are not bound by this rule in exercising our original jurisdiction. In Virginia v. West
    Search
  24. U.S. Supreme Court Texas v. New
    Search
  25. Dyer v. Sims
    Search
  26. State. Maryland v. Louisiana
    Search
  27. Vermont v. New
    Search
  28. New Jersey v. New
    Search
  29. See Maryland v. Louisiana
    Search
  30. Pierce v. United
    Search
  31. In Virginia v. West
    Search
  32. Rhode Island v. Massachusetts
    Search
  33. Wyoming v. Colorado
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales