(Corrie Boudreaux/El Paso Matters). New Mexico and Colorado is the latest lawsuit over water between The buoy lawsuit is likely to drag on for a while. The Justice Department filed a lawsuit against Texas for placing the buoys in the Rio Grande. The state governments of Texas and New Mexico have spent more than Reed Benson, a law professor at the University of New Mexico with. Greg Abbott. DAVIES: Well, the barrier has really ticked off Mexico. received the license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The second half of the trial, with in-person testimony from experts on the technical aspects of the case, will take place in the spring, in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Abortion pill ruling bets the Supreme Court will go beyond Dobbs. In response, Texas filed a lawsuit against New Mexico in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2014, alleging New Mexico takes more than its fair share of the water through diversion and groundwater pumping. Danielle Prokop is a climate change and environment reporter with El Paso Matters. Tell us about those. (Photo by Corrie Boudreaux / El Paso Matters). The Supreme Court case originates from a deal hammered out between two irrigation districts and the federal government during the drought of the early 2000s. Please consider making a donation today so we can cover the stories that matter most. Both law firms entered into a sole-source agreement, meaning the contract was not competitively bid out. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. I do think we could separate out the issues in a way that we could, over the next two or three months, get a number of weeks of testimony concluded this fall and leave the more complex testimony for the spring, Melloy said. It included testimony from federal and state agencies, farmers, irrigation managers, and El Paso and Las Cruces city officials. How to solve the nuclear waste problem: put it back to work. by Danielle Prokop, El Paso Matters, Source New Mexico January 4, 2022. But moving the buoys closer to Texas is not going to take care of the main issue of this lawsuit. Petitioners pray that, upon review, the Court will hold unlawful and set aside the order issuing Materials License No. Colorado is required to deliver the water to the state line. Nuclear waste storage facility at Texas-New Mexico border granted federal license, A similar proposal over the border in southeast New Mexico, Texas Legislature passed House Bill 7 during a special session, WIPP: New panels to dispose of nuclear waste, NRC: Court lacks authority in New Mexico lawsuit against nuclear waste site, Nuclear waste facility near Carlsbad sees COVID-19 surge as infections rise in New Mexico, a similar suit filed in March by New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas, Your California Privacy Rights/Privacy Policy. State proposes 7% teacher salary raise next year as part of $3.85 billion budget ask, Your California Privacy Rights / Privacy Policy. You can explore additional available newsletters here. CBP, Jurez police announce arrest as part of 'Fence Cutter Initiative', Doa Ana County clerk declines invitation to talk to conservative group about elections. This isnt the first fight New Mexico and Texas had over the Rio Grande. In a 2011 federal lawsuit, New Mexico alleged the federal government The Justice Department is suing Texas, which is using the barrier to deter migrants from crossing the river into the U.S. Rio Grande flows from Caballo Dam for irrigation and water allotment. Melloy gave the United States until Jan. 6 to respond. In re Texas-New Mexico Power Co. (Opinion) - Justia Law A settlement in the Texas v. New Mexico case may be on the horizon after months of negotiations. The ruling was finalized in 1987, where the Supreme Court laid out the duties and responsibilities for the river masters position, only the second one in the nation. A representative for Kinney County did not immediately return an email seeking comment. It included testimony from federal and state agencies, farmers, irrigation managers, and El Paso and Las Cruces city officials. Then there was a major technical undertaking to determine how to quantify New Mexicos obligation and determine the extent the state fell short, Benson said. Colorado is named as a defendant only because it is a signatory on the Rio Grande Compact. Plaintiffs, a larger number of homeowners near the Junemann Bayou and Las Marque, sued TNM, their electric utility, for damages due to flooding during Hurricane Harvey, alleging that TNM was negligent in not requiring its contractor to secure wooden mats to the ground during a construction project. And they all came away saying things like, quote, "this is a war zone." 1 (EPCWID), the Elephant Butte Irrigation District (EBID), the city of El Paso and the city of Las Cruces are among the friends of the court amici curiae who can file briefs but are not parties to the case. El Paso Matters is dedicated to providing our community with the information to make educated, informed decisions. There was an error and we couldn't process your subscription. Source New Mexico maintains editorial independence. A saw blade, my goodness. Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. The state governments of Texas and New Mexico have spent more than Texas imprisoned migrants after they should have been released, But the compact only allowed for two commissioners one from each state which meant deadlocked votes in disputes. It was adisagreement over evaporation lossesin a one-time event in 2014 and 2015 that wont have much impact beyond the Pecos Basin. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. What you need to know about the latest in the Texas v. New Mexico Supreme Court case, January trial date set for Texas v. New Mexico US Supreme Court Rio Grande water case, Your California Privacy Rights/Privacy Policy. She can be reached atdprokop@elpasomatters.org. It will be a virtual trial with testimony from a list of witnesses that have yet to be selected by the parties. You already receive all suggested Justia Opinion Summary Newsletters. The second part of the trial was initially slated to begin March 13. These issues were "carved out" from water management issues within the state of New Mexico. 1:51 A U.S. Supreme Court representative granted Texas and New Mexico more time to settle a years-long dispute over Rio Grande water out of court. Shes covered climate, local government and community at the Scottsbluff Star-Herald in Nebraska and the Santa Fe New Mexican. 141 Original Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado is the latest lawsuit over water between Texas and New Mexico. Unlike a trial judge however, the special master does not make decisions but only advises the court. It can make for some political grandstanding. More: Nuclear waste storage facility at Texas-New Mexico border granted federal license. The 12th and most recent amendment increased the states maximum obligation to the firm to $21,179,781 through December 2021. The U.S. Supreme Court appointed Melloy to oversee and determine facts as a trial judge. So, they need special masters to essentially play the role of a trial judge to tee up an interstate water dispute for the Supreme Court.. Our stories may be republished online or in print under Creative Commons licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Tribes need tax revenue. If this case doesnt settle, then this litigation is certainly going to go on, many years into the future, Benson said. Accuracy and availability may vary. Benson covered the Pecos case for SCOTUSblog during its latest development in October 2020. "The settlement ensures that Texas and New Mexico receive their fair share of water," said Jeffrey Wechsler, special assistant to the New Mexico Attorney General. Source New Mexico is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. The Environmental Protection Division in the Texas Attorney Generals Office billed the state more than $247,000 since fiscal year 2012. All rights reserved. The United States Department of Justice intervened in the case, siding with Texas. In an Aug. 19 filing, the Texas Attorney Generals Office wrote that the lead counsel for Texas, Stuart Somach, had an unexpected, personal family emergency, preventing him from attending the trial over several months. Texas sued, alleging that upstream New Mexico chronically shorted Texas at the state line and used too much water. In 2008, the two irrigation districts entered into an agreement with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. MARTNEZ: Wow. The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of mandamus sought by Texas-New Mexico Power Co. (TNM) in this negligence action, holding that Plaintiffs' claim was not one within the Public Utility Commission's (PUC) exclusive original jurisdiction because it was not about TNM's operations and services as a utility. Parties in the rancorous lawsuit between Texas and New Mexico over groundwater pumping on the Rio Grande are in settlement talks to possibly end the dispute. They included: state laws governing water are inapplicable to the case; the exact amounts of river water each state should get; how much has groundwater development impacted the Rio Grande deliveries in the past or present; and how much water New Mexico can and cannot capture downstream of Elephant Butte Dam. Special Master Melloy is a senior appellate judge for the 8th U.S. The issuance for the Texas facility came after continued opposition to the project from west Texas lawmakers and Gov. It escalated when Texas filed a new lawsuit against New Mexico in the U.S. Supreme Court three years later alleging New Mexico takes more than its fair share of the water through diversion and groundwater pumping. You've seen these buoys firsthand. EL PASO - Parties in the rancorous lawsuit between Texas and New Mexico over groundwater pumping on the Rio Grande are in settlement talks to possibly end the dispute. The lawsuit, called No. States spend big money in the Texas v. New Mexico Supreme The pending second portion, if it goes forward, is to include in-person technical testimony on various models from hydrologists and other scientists. Both law firms entered into a sole-source agreement, meaning the contract was not competitively bid out. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Texas claimed damages over $100 million, and New Mexico settled for $14 million for past noncompliance. New U.S. House Natural Resources chair opposes limits on, Maya Srikrishnan, Center For Public Integrity. What the Texas-New Mexico dispute over the Pecos River can tell us about the Rio Grande fight. We ask that you edit only for style or to shorten, provide proper attribution and link to our web site. In a 2011 federal lawsuit, New Mexico alleged the federal government Water rushes through the Caballo Dam into the Rio Grande in New Mexico in May. The compact was ratified by all three states and Congress 82 years ago in 1939. The buoys have also caused some diplomatic tension between the U.S. and Mexico, which Texas Governor Greg Abbott spoke about yesterday. Theyre not real eager to set up these arrangements where somebody like the Pecos River master is going to make a decision, and the only way that can get reviewed is if the Supreme Court does it. New Mexico attorneys said the federal government failed to allocate water fairly and alleged accounting issues about water allocations for Texas and Mexico. The court declined, citing the compacts limits on voting members. Follow Source New Mexico on Facebook and Twitter. The Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of mandamus sought by Texas-New Mexico Power Co. (TNM) in this negligence action, holding that Plaintiffs' claim was not one within the Public Utility Commission's (PUC) exclusive original jurisdiction because it was not about TNM's operations and services as a utility. Those powers are limited by one measure the court said its own solution cant violate the terms states agreed to in the compact. Tensions boiled over in 1974, when Texas sued New Mexico in the Supreme Court over groundwater pumping and other activities that Texas argued depleted flows of the Pecos River. Texas also accused New Mexico of violating the Rio Grande Compact, an 82-year-old agreement that spells out how Colorado, New Mexico and Texas split the river. I would anticipate anyway, that this case could still have quite a ways to go., by Danielle Prokop, El Paso Matters, Source New Mexico August 31, 2021. Here's what happened. in April 2020, Melloy summed up his understanding of the cases complexities, and what issues he thought would be determined at trial. The Attorney Generals Office agreed to pay two separate firms just under $2.4 million in July 2020 after awarding two contracts for nearly $1.2 million to each firm. To read the original go. The Texas attorney generals office did not respond to a request for comment. There is presently no permanent holding place for the waste and critics of the project feared it could become a de facto permanent resting place for the waste. Texas brought the case against New Mexico in 2013, alleging that In 2021, the Attorney Generals Office increased the firms reimbursement, citing mandated mediation and aggressive pre-trial deadlines. The office would pay $1,294,500 to Trout Raley Montano Witwer, and $2,017,263 to Robles Rael & Anaya. Neither Texas nor New Mexico were parties to the agreement. As part of its ongoing efforts to block Interim Storage Partners proposal, the Texas Legislature passed House Bill 7 during a special session earlier this month to ban high-level nuclear waste storage in the state. He decided the trial will be pushed back but only by a few weeks. 1:16. If the court decides in Texas favor, that could mean paying more than a billion dollars in damages, on top of the$15 millionit spent on legal fees. It also set up a new formula to determine how much water would make its way downstream to Texas, which would be evaluated at a later time. Most have either had their cases dismissed or entered guilty pleas in exchange for time served. What you need to know about the latest in the Texas v. "This is a settlement over the objection of three major participating entities, who all run the project, and who all will be responsible for implementing this settlement," said attorney Samantha Barncastle, representing EBID. The details of the proposed settlement remain confidential but Texas and New Mexico described it as a resolution for the disputes between the states. Mexico is pledging that they're going to do a lot more to stop the flow of the narcotic fentanyl flowing across the border. Texas lawsuit follows a similar suit filed in March by New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas aimed at stopping Holtecs proposal. In an online status conference Tuesday, attorneys representing New Mexico, Texas and Colorado told special master Michael Melloy, who presides over the case, they reached a settlement. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information. Instead, the Supreme Court ordered New Mexico to provide an additional 10,000 acre feet annually to Texas, and would appoint a river master to determine if New Mexico met its obligations. And the water that they're in is just about shin-deep. The Supreme Court denied the petition, holding that the PUC's exclusive original jurisdiction did not extend to the issues underlying this tort claim. Attorneys for New Mexico filed for a dismissal, denying the claims. The state governments of Texas and New Mexico have spent more than $30 million combined on legal fees in the fightover Rio Grande water, which is now before the United States Supreme Court. . The dam was opened to release water to southern New Mexico and El Paso. Abbott was joined at the border Monday by the Republican governors of Iowa, Nebraska, Oklahoma and South Dakota, all of whom have sent their own armed law enforcement and National Guard members to the border. (Colorado is also named in the lawsuit, but is not presenting a case, as the issues are between New Mexico and Texas.). 141 Original Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado, is an extension ofdecades-long fightsover rivers between Texas and New Mexico. Right now, we let our nuclear waste sit until it's less radioactive. The case is solely before the U.S. Supreme Court instead of being heard first in lower courts because it involves two states and a dispute over water. Source New Mexico maintains editorial independence. "It resolves Texas' claims and New Mexicos counterclaims. Reed Benson, a law professor at the University of New Mexico with decades of experience in water management, said the Supreme Court uses special masters to conduct extensive research, establish a record and make recommendations to the court in these water management cases. This is a huge crisis for the United States. Greg Abbotts latest hardline measure to deter migrants from crossing. NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. Texas retrieves anti-migrant buoys that moved to
Stony Brook Mha Curriculum, Section 8 Portability Rules, Articles T