PUB00160 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-;: w~~ S ~k W~\-vOo--..~ ~f0l LOi>~ . A Legal Analysis of Sporhase v. Nebraska, 458 U.S. 941 (1982) by Charles T. DuMars, Esq. Professor of Law Emeritus, University of New Mexico School of Law Senior Attorney Law & Resource Planning Associates, P.C. A ttorneys at Law Albuquerque, New Mexico & David Seeley, Ph.D., Esq. Associate Attorney Law & Resource Planning Associates, P .C. Attorneys at Law Albuquerque, New Mexico !. This paper focuses on three tasks. First, it explicates the historical context of Sporhase and reads the latter in that light. Second, it tracks the reasoning of Sporhase as it is implemented in City of EI Paso v. Reynolds, 597 F.Supp. 694 (D.N.M. 1984). Third, it outlines more broadly the implications of Sporhase for states' control of their water resources. Svorhase Within the Historical Context of the Commerce Clause The Sporhase Court set the questions before it squarely within the framework of the Commerce Clause. The Court began its opinion as follows: Appellants challenge the constitutionality of a Nebraska statutory restriction on the withdrawal of ground water from any well within Nebraska intended for use in an adjoining State. The challenge presents three questions under the Commerce Clause: (footnote omitted) (1) whether ground water is an article of commerce and therefore subject to congressional regulation; (2) whether the Nebraska restriction on the interstate transfer of ground water imposes an impermissible burden on commerce; and (3) whether Congress has granted the States permission to engage in ground water regulation that otherwise would be impermissible. Sporhase, 458 U.S. at 943. Given the central importance of the Commerce Clause for Sporhase, any . approach to the opinion is well advised to take into account that provision and its 1