Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has issued a statement in response to the Supreme Court of the United States' (SCOTUS) split decision, which grants the federal government increased authority over states and halts an agreement between Texas, New Mexico, and Colorado that aimed to secure vital water allotments for Texas farmers.
In 2013, Texas sued New Mexico to enforce the equitable apportionment of Rio Grande waters as agreed upon in the 1938 Rio Grande Compact. After nearly ten years, the states reached an agreement that would ensure Texas received a fair water distribution. In 2023, a Special Master appointed by SCOTUS supported this agreement, stating: “[I]t is difficult to envision a resolution to this matter that might be superior to the Consent Decree [that Texas seeks].”
However, in a 5-4 decision, the Court rejected this agreement at the behest of the Biden Administration, thereby allowing federal interference with state agreements within their jurisdictions.
“I am disappointed that a narrow majority of the Supreme Court has unfortunately and incorrectly granted the federal government even more power over the States,” said Attorney General Paxton. “Every State in this case and even the special master appointed by the Supreme Court itself supported the consent decree that would put an end to more than a decade of litigation and ensure Texas farmers have access to vital water supplies. However, the Biden Administration objected, claiming that they can unilaterally block the States' resolution of a dispute between themselves. We will continue to work to ensure that the rights of Texas farmers are protected during the next steps of the process.”
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Neil Gorsuch stated: “The Court’s decision is inconsistent with how original jurisdiction cases normally proceed. It defies 100 years of this Court’s water law jurisprudence. And it represents a serious assault on the power of States to govern, as they always have, the water rights of users in their jurisdictions.”
To read both opinions and dissents from this case, click here.