Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BarnacleCenturion
They don’t want to kick out a federal agency. They just want to cut off its water supply. McCulloch v. Maryland doesn’t apply. Utah just needs the water for something else. Irrigation maybe. They have a good case and can win in court.

Sure, ok, I'm sure that will be persuasive in a federal court of law. Because Utah just randomly shuts off water to other facilities all the time. This is too cute by half, and is precisely the situation the court addressed nearly 200 years ago in McCulloch. There Maryland was simply trying to "tax out of state banks" - but as in this case, the actual motive was easy to figure out.

60 posted on 02/13/2014 4:02:28 PM PST by Alter Kaker (Gravitation is a theory, not a fact. It should be approached with an open mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies ]


To: Alter Kaker

It depends on the water law in Utah.

Most easterners are utterly ignorant of wester water law. There’s more kinks and tricks embedded in western states’ water law than most people can possibly realize. Things like “best use” and “seniority” can trump even the federal government.

BTW, while the Feds control much western land, they don’t control the water, especially sub-surface water. That’s controlled by the state engineers in the various states.


72 posted on 02/14/2014 10:04:53 PM PST by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson