Posted on 11/22/2021 8:22:55 PM PST by blueplum
The Supreme Court of the United States unanimously rejected Mississippi’s claim against Tennessee for using too much of its groundwater.
In this case, Mississippi claimed Tennessee should have prevented Memphis Light, Gas & Water Division from pumping groundwater from the Memphis Sand Aquifer over the state line. It argued that Tennessee’s “knowing, intentional, and forcible pumping of groundwater” violated Mississippi’s sovereignty and constitutes a wrongful taking of the state’s “most valuable natural resource.” All nine justices, however, disagreed....
...Roberts seemed particularly annoyed by Mississippi’s argument, pointing out that, “Mississippi claims an absolute ‘ownership’ right to all groundwater beneath its surface—even after that water has crossed its borders,”...
(Excerpt) Read more at lawandcrime.com ...
What is this about? Given the depradations from flooding I would have thought both of these states had more ground water than they know what to do with, hence the periodic flooding.
Georgia tried something like this a few years ago too...
Tennessee to Mississippi: I drink your milkshake!
Note this is a line from the movie “There will be blood”.
I would think groundwater is flowing from TN into MS.
TN is at a higher elevation.
ON average TN is 900 feet above sea level. MS only 300 feet.
Maybe MS should be paying TN. We’ll accept catfish as payment.
I figured the case would be thrown out over that “standing thing”. Please excuse my use of arcane terms like the one in quotes. LOL
I found a drawing that shows the state lines of AR, MS, TN and how they share in the Memphis Sands Aquifer
it also gives us this blurb:”the state of Mississippi claims MLGW wells have altered the flow of aquifer water, pulling more of it northward across the state line. Losing that suit could result in Memphis paying $615 million in damages and having to turn to the Mississippi River to get some of its water.”
https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/news/environment/2016/12/16/memphis-sand-aquifer-buried-treasure/93814278/
another hint and some background on the multiple lawsuits can be found here:
“Mississippi has also attempted to draw this distinction by presenting a “two aquifer” theory, suggesting that what is colloquially known as the Sparta Sands aquifer in Mississippi and Arkansas is structurally distinct from what Memphians call the Memphis Sands aquifer, when according to the USGS the two aquifers are hydraulically connected and refer to the same underground reservoir.”
https://undark.org/2020/09/07/memphis-aquifer-supreme-court/
The title is a play off the movie My Cousin Vinnie.
After this has been litigated for over 16 years, SCOTUS made the right call on this one. At stake was the issue of interstate water rights. Mississippi and Tennessee share the prolific Memphis Sands aquifer (also known as the Sparta Aquifer in Mississippi) and claimed that Tennessee - or more specifically Memphis - was stealing their water. As a hydrogeologist, I can tell you that Mississippi’s position was not a winnable one, but they just kept on pushing this litigation until SCOTUS finally slapped them down. This will be, however, a precedent-setting decision for interstate water rights in the U.S., as there are a number of other large aquifers that straddle state lines, especially in the mid-west and it is likely this SCOTUS decision will be used as the basis for management of those shared aquifers.
........even a broken clock (John Roberts et al) is right twice a day.
Battles over water in aquifers that run under different counties is a long term battle in Nevada.
Whiskey is for drinking...
Water is for fighting over.
It is troubling that Thomas and Alito agreed with the libs. I suspect some sort of unlawful pressure was applied to these patriots.
Those 5-to-4 decisions on the Supreme Court? 9 to 0 is far ...
Search domain washingtonpost.comhttps://www.washingtonpost.com › news › posteverything › wp › 2018 › 06 › 28 › those-5-4-decisions-on-the-supreme-court-9-0-is-far-more-common
Jun 28, 2018Those 5-to-4 decisions on the Supreme Court? 9 to 0 is far more common. Splits get all the attention, but consensus is the rule, and that’s how it should be. Unanimous decisions of the Supreme ...
*********************************************************
This article has the Washington Post name on it so take it with a grain of salt.
So they are more compromised than I thought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.