Implications of the Mississippi v. Tennessee Supreme Court Decision for Interstate Groundwater Management
© 2024 The Authors. Groundwater published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Ground Water Association.
| Veröffentlicht in: | Ground water. - 1979. - 62(2024), 4 vom: 02. Juli, Seite 502-512 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Weitere Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Online-Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2024
|
| Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk: | Ground water |
| Schlagworte: | Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. |
| Zusammenfassung: | © 2024 The Authors. Groundwater published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of National Ground Water Association. Groundwater allocation is rapidly becoming a contentious water resource management problem around the world. It is anticipated that the effects of climate change would further aggravate this problem. Conflicts over the distribution of freshwater are expected to increase as stakeholders want to access more groundwater to meet their growing demands. In the United States, water conflicts are settled through a litigation process. Water litigations can be expensive, protracted, and fraught with complex legal and technical difficulties. A landmark groundwater case involving Tennessee (TN) and Mississippi (MS) was recently litigated in the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). In this case, MS sued TN for stealing their groundwater and SCOTUS unanimously ruled that the water contained in the aquifer that naturally crosses the border between TN and MS is subject to equitable apportionment. This decision has significant ramifications for groundwater management as it established a precedent for resolving future interstate groundwater litigations. Although the Court has previously applied the legal doctrine of equitable apportionment to settle disputes involving surface water use, this is the first instance in which the doctrine has been applied to resolve an interstate groundwater dispute. Therefore, currently, there are little or no guidelines available for equitably distributing groundwater resources between two states. The objective of this article is to examine this historic legal dispute to fully understand the scientific justification for the judicial stances taken by the plaintiff and defendants, and the legal reasoning for the final verdict. We also discuss the challenges this ruling presents for managing interstate groundwater resources |
|---|---|
| Beschreibung: | Date Completed 05.07.2024 Date Revised 03.08.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status MEDLINE |
| ISSN: | 1745-6584 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/gwat.13399 |