The Tarrant Regional Water District's nearly 6-year-old lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma received a significant boost Friday when the U.S. solicitor general's office recommended that the U.S. Supreme Court review the case.
In April, the court invited the solicitor general "to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of United States" after the water district appealed the decision by an Oklahoma federal judge to dismiss the case and a federal appeals court upheld the dismissal."This case implicates important state interests protected by an interstate compact, and the court of appeal's decision has potentially great practical consequences for the availability of water in a major urban area in Texas," the solicitor general's brief says. "Those concerns justify this Court's review."The water district sued Oklahoma in January 2007, seeking to divert more than 130 billion gallons from river basins just north of the Red River as part of a long-term water supply for North Texas.If the solicitor general had backed Oklahoma's position -- that the state has the right to refuse to sell water to out-of-state customers -- it likely would have meant the end of the case. The solicitor general's recommendation is no guarantee that the justices will take up the case.Still, Jim Oliver, general manager of the water district, called the recommendation a crucial step in its legal fight."This is a significant development, and an important step in resolving the legal questions concerning our rights to water under the Red River Compact," Oliver said. The water district provides raw water to 98 percent of Tarrant County.The Supreme Court hears only a small portion of the cases presented for appeal, but the chances that it will take a case improve when the solicitor general's office is asked to offer its opinion.The solicitor general is appointed by the White House to represent the views of the federal government in Supreme Court cases.The water district has contended that the lawsuit could affect interstate water compacts nationwide; Oklahoma's lawyers have said it is a narrow dispute.The case revolves around the Red River Compact, which says each state gets an "equitable apportionment of water" from the Red River and its tributaries. Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana signed the compact, which was approved by Congress in 1980.The water district contends that the Oklahoma Legislature violated the compact by passing a 2009 bill that said Oklahoma's water would not be available to other states without the Legislature's approval.The district has said more than 18 metropolitan areas nationwide rely on water supplies governed by interstate compacts, including Los Angeles, San Diego and Sacramento, Calif. Denver, Atlanta, Phoenix, Tucson, Las Vegas and Salt Lake City could also be affected.After the water district sued Oklahoma in 2007, other water providers, including Dallas and the North Texas Municipal Water District, which supplies water to some Dallas suburbs, joined the suit.Before the solicitor general was invited to offer an opinion in April, the water district had a series of legal setbacks.In July 2010, an Oklahoma federal judge dismissed the suit, and the district appealed the case to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In September, a three-judge panel upheld the lower court's dismissal, and in October the 10th Circuit denied a request for rehearing before the full court.The Supreme Court asks for the solicitor general's advice an average of only 12 times a year, according to a 2009 George Mason University Law Review study.The report said that about 1 percent of cases appealed to the Supreme Court are accepted but that those in which the solicitor general's opinion was sought stand a 34 percent chance.Bill Hanna, 817-390-7698Twitter: @fwhannaHave more to add? News tip? Tell us
