Supreme Court rules against Navajo Nation in Colorado River water rights case

Doobie Doo

Veteran
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
62,895
Reputation
24,981
Daps
406,017
Reppin
Raleigh, NC


Supreme Court rules against Navajo Nation in Colorado River water rights case​


By JESSICA GRESKO32 minutes ago


FILE - The Colorado River in the upper River Basin is pictured in Lees Ferry, Ariz., on May 29, 2021. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File)
1 of 4
FILE - The Colorado River in the upper River Basin is pictured in Lees Ferry, Ariz., on May 29, 2021. (AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin, File)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court ruled against the Navajo Nation on Thursday in a dispute involving water from the drought-stricken Colorado River.
States that draw water from the river — Arizona, Nevada and Colorado — and water districts in California that are also involved in the case had urged the court to decide for them, which the justices did in a 5-4 ruling. Colorado had argued that siding with the Navajo Nation would undermine existing agreements and disrupt the management of the river.
The Biden administration had said that if the court were to come down in favor of the Navajo Nation, the federal government could face lawsuits from many other tribes.
Lawyers for the Navajo Nation had characterized the tribe’s request as modest, saying they simply were seeking an assessment of the tribe’s water needs and a plan to meet them.
The facts of the case go back to treaties that the tribe and the federal government signed in 1849 and 1868. The second treaty established the reservation as the tribe’s “permanent home” — a promise the Navajo Nation says includes a sufficient supply of water. In 2003 the tribe sued the federal government, arguing it had failed to consider or protect the Navajo Nation’s water rights to the lower portion of the Colorado River.


Writing for a majority made up of conservative justices, Justice Brett Kavanaugh explained that “the Navajos contend that the treaty requires the United States to take affirmative steps to secure water for the Navajos — for example, by assessing the Tribe’s water needs, developing a plan to secure the needed water, and potentially building pipelines, pumps, wells, or other water infrastructure.”
But, Kavanaugh said, “In light of the treaty’s text and history, we conclude that the treaty does not require the United States to take those affirmative steps.”
Kavanaugh acknowledged that water issues are difficult ones.
“Allocating water in the arid regions of the American West is often a zero-sum situation,” he wrote. It is important, he said, for courts to leave “to Congress and the President the responsibility to enact appropriations laws and to otherwise update federal law as they see fit in light of the competing contemporary needs for water.”
A federal trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit, but an appeals court allowed it to go forward. The Supreme Court’s decision reverses that ruling from the appeals court.
In a dissent, Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that he would have allowed the case to go forward and he characterized the Navajo’s position as a “simple ask.”
“Where do the Navajo go from here?” he wrote. “To date, their efforts to find out what water rights the United States holds for them have produced an experience familiar to any American who has spent time at the Department of Motor Vehicles. The Navajo have waited patiently for someone, anyone, to help them, only to be told (repeatedly) that they have been standing in the wrong line and must try another.”
Gorsuch said one “silver lining” of the case may be that his colleagues in the majority recognized that the tribe may still be able to “assert the interests they claim in water rights litigation, including by seeking to intervene in cases that affect their claimed interests.”
Gorsuch, a conservative, was joined by the court’s three liberals: Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.
During arguments in the case in March, Justice Samuel Alito pointed out that the Navajo Nation’s original reservation was hundreds of miles away from the section of the Colorado River it now seeks water from.
Today, the Colorado River flows along what is now the northwestern border of the tribe’s reservation, which extends into New Mexico, Utah and Arizona. Two of the river’s tributaries, the San Juan River and the Little Colorado River, also pass alongside and through the reservation. Still, one-third of the some 175,000 people who live on the reservation, the largest in the country, do not have running water in their homes.
The government argued that it has helped the tribe secure water from the Colorado River’s tributaries and provided money for infrastructure, including pipelines, pumping plants and water treatment facilities. But it said no law or treaty required the government to assess and address the tribe’s general water needs. The states involved in the case argued that the Navajo Nation was attempting to make an end run around a Supreme Court decree that divvied up water in the Colorado River’s Lower Basin.



 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
7,751
Reputation
2,755
Daps
24,088
Reppin
Des Moines, IA
Imagine the 'water wars' that will be fought over the next 50 years around the world as climate change impact grows exponentially and natural resources are plucked dry by mismanagement and greed. This lawsuit and ruling are just a drop in the bucket.

I sometimes worry that it was a mistake to bring children into this world, knowing what my future grandchildren my have to suffer through.
 

Buddy

FAIA (Foundational African In America) 😤
Joined
Apr 28, 2014
Messages
21,425
Reputation
7,553
Daps
89,008
Just another broken 'treaty'

I'd say more, but I don't wanna hurt no feelings :youngsabo:
 
Joined
Jan 24, 2016
Messages
22,007
Reputation
5,124
Daps
51,840
if i understand correctly, the ruling is not saying the navajos don't have rights to the water..... it's just saying the feds don't have to put in certain work to get the water to the navajos. welp, this is where the tribal sovereignty is going to have to kick in and their government is going to have to put in that work!

and before anybody at me with the bs, i am a tribal member so i understand how the tribal politics plays a role in keeping certain nations behind... when people just elect their family/friends that may not even be qualified or just want to get involved for personal benefits/kickbacks, and general political bs. the navajo nation is a great one. fukk waiting on the feds or the state....hire some attorneys, hire some people with infrastructure experience and get the people what they need :ufdup:
 

wire28

Blade said what up
Supporter
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
59,478
Reputation
13,484
Daps
214,931
Reppin
#ByrdGang #TheColi
They hit you nikkas with the okey file on that gerrymandering shyt the other day. Just wait til they show what else they got in the chamber :wow: don’t even ask me how
 

MajesticLion

Veteran
Joined
Jul 17, 2018
Messages
35,388
Reputation
7,287
Daps
76,534
ha @ putting faith people who sign treaties and pick and chose when to uphold their end


Who cannot hear must feel.
 

BigBlackSea

All Star
Joined
Mar 11, 2022
Messages
1,483
Reputation
440
Daps
5,896
Trying to slowly finish them off :francis:

Expected unfortunately
They won't even ensure clean drinking water in Flint and in black rural communities in the deep south
The United Corporations of America making it known that the solely citizens are expendable cogs to do with as they please.

If Nestlé wanted a plant built there, there would be all types of money funneled for infrastructure.
 
Top