deal
SCOTUS rejects water deal in Rio Grande dispute
A recent Supreme Court decision has stalled a settlement in the long-standing water dispute over the Rio Grande, impacting New Mexico, Texas, and the federal government.
In short:
- The Supreme Court rejected a proposed settlement to resolve water disputes between Texas and New Mexico, citing federal interests.
- The case, initiated by Texas in 2013, accuses New Mexico of over-pumping groundwater, violating the 1938 Rio Grande Compact.
- Experts warn this decision might embolden federal involvement in interstate water disputes, prolonging litigation.
Key quote:
“Having acknowledged those interests, and having allowed the United States to intervene to assert them, we cannot now allow Texas and New Mexico to leave the United States up the river without a paddle.”
— Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson
Why this matters:
Water rights are critical for agriculture and municipal use in arid regions. This ruling could set a precedent for federal involvement in state water disputes, complicating future negotiations and regional water management.
Tree-sitter heartbroken by pipeline deal
Theresa “Red” Terry made international headlines for tree-sitting in the path of the Mountain Valley Pipeline for 34 straight days in 2018. Five years later, she feels despondent about the federal debt deal that cleared a path for the long-stalled pipeline project to be completed.
These races will shape what the us elections mean for climate progress
Whether the White House changes hands is the most important climate question of the 2020 elections.
Jonathan Franzen is wrong. Climate change demands big dreams
The Green New Deal is cheaper than climate change
Ford, Honda, BMW, and Volkswagen’s fuel economy deal with California, explained
Trump vows to lower fuel emission standards after California deal
President Donald Trump will move ahead with a new rule to lower national standards on car and vehicle emissions, ignoring a deal by California and four auto makers.