Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. 000423' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />economy. Problems under the compact began to surface within a few <br /> <br />years. <br /> <br />Approximately twenty years ago the State of Texas initiated <br /> <br />a suit against Dew Mexico in the United States Supreme Court in which <br /> <br />it was alleged that New Mexico was not living up to its compact agree- <br /> <br />ment. The United States intervened as an indispen~able party but <br /> <br />withheld its consent to be sued. The suit was dismissed. Subsequently <br /> <br />New Mexico, with considerable federal assistance, improved its delivery <br /> <br />capability through extensive channel rectification measures on the <br /> <br />lower Rio Grande. <br /> <br />In more recent years the States of Texas and New Mexico <br /> <br />have instituted proceedings against the State of Colorado in the <br /> <br />Supreme Court alleging that Colorado is in violation of the terms of <br /> <br />the Rio Grande River Compact. By order dated February 13, 1967, the <br /> <br />Supreme Court invited the Solicitor General to submit the views of <br /> <br />the United States on the pending action. In his reply to the court, <br /> <br />the Solicitor General made this recommendation: <br /> <br />"We suggest, therefore, that the Court stay any further <br />action in this case for six months, until October 16, 1967. <br />That would afford a reasonable time for the interested <br />parties to demonstrate the feasibility and imminence of an <br />equitable administrative solution. In the meantime the <br />United States will explore the matter of an administrative <br />solution in conjunction with the three states. If at the end <br />of this period it appears that the matter can be resolved only <br />by litigation, we shall then inform the Court whether the <br />United States will intervene." <br /> <br />-6- <br />