Thesis
This Supreme court cases is about disputes over water distribution from the Colorado River between states of Arizona and California. It was ruled that California gets a maximum of 50% up to 4,400,000 acre feet (5.4 km3) of Colorado River water a year or less according to certain formula; Nevada gets 4% and Arizona gets the remainder. I think this is the most fair that it could have gotten, because Nevada still needs to get water too and it was split good in my eyes.
Background on case:
Arizona decided to initiate this litigation primarily because its efforts to get Congress to authorize the Central Arizona Project which would bring water from the main Colorado River to the central region of the state. In 1944, Arizona was moving aggressively to get CAP in action to bring water from Colorado River to Arizona. Congress in 1951 decided to suspend the project. Arizona needed to get the U.S Supreme court to declare that it had legal rights to lower Basin water that CAP( Central Arizona Project) would be feasible. California wanted more water for the growing population, California's population is expanding out and more and more people are deciding to come. Policymakers and water planners found out best that they should get water from
…show more content…
Arizona also argued that the allocation proposed in Article 4(a) of the boulder Canyon Project Act authorizing a three state compact, and stating that it now accepted this allocation as “fair” and “equitable”. Arizona also said that california had constructed facilities capable of diverting as much as an eight maf if they used it. If this happened California would deprive Arizona of water to which it was legally entitled. Arizona wanted the water rights so they can continue with the projects they have aside for the future for Arizona and many projects were relying on the water from the Colorado