|
|
United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978)
United States v. California No. 5, Orig. Argued February 27, 1978 Decided May 15, 1978 436 U.S. 32
ON MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A THIRD SUPPLEMENTAL DECREE
Syllabus
California, and not the United States, has dominion over the submerged lands and waters within the one-mile belts surrounding Santa Barbara and Anacapa Islands within the Channel Islands National Monument. When, by Presidential Proclamation in 1949, the Monument was enlarged to encompass areas within one nautical mile of the shorelines of these islands, the submerged lands and waters within the one-mile belts were under federal dominion as a result of this Court’s decision two years earlier in United States v. California, 332 U.S. 19. But, assuming that the Proclamation intended to reserve such submerged lands and waters, dominion over them was subsequently transferred to California by the Submerged Lands Act, whose very purpose was to undo that decision. The § 5(a) "claim of right" exemption from the Act’s broad grant, relied on by the Government, clearly does not apply to claims based on the 1947 California decision. The reservation for a national monument made by the 1949 Proclamation could not enhance the Government’s claim to the submerged lands and waters in dispute, since the statutory authority under which such monuments are created merely authorizes land to be shifted from one federal use to another. Pp. 36-41.
STEWART, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BRENNAN, POWELL, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. WHITE, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BURGER, C.J., and BLACKMUN, J., joined, post, p. 42. MARSHALL, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978) in 436 U.S. 32 436 U.S. 33. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=IAW8W37B9WDDS1E.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978), in 436 U.S. 32, page 436 U.S. 33. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=IAW8W37B9WDDS1E.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32 (1978). cited in 1978, 436 U.S. 32, pp.436 U.S. 33. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=IAW8W37B9WDDS1E.
|