Washington v. United States
Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
17-269 | 9th Cir. | Apr 18, 2018 | Jun 11, 2018 | 4-4 | Per Curiam | OT 2017 |
Issue: (1) Whether a treaty "right of taking fish, at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations ... in common with all citizens" guaranteed "that the number of fish would always be sufficient to provide a "moderate living" to the tribes"; (2) whether the district court erred in dismissing the state's equitable defenses against the federal government where the federal government signed these treaties in the 1850"s, for decades told the state to design culverts a particular way, and then filed suit in 2001 claiming that the culvert design it provided violates the treaties it signed; and (3) whether the district court"s injunction violates federalism and comity principles by requiring Washington to replace hundreds of culverts, at a cost of several billion dollars, when many of the replacements will have no impact on salmon, and plaintiffs showed no clear connection between culvert replacement and tribal fisheries.
Judgment: Affirmed by an equally divided court in a per curiam opinion on June 11, 2018.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- OT2017 #29: "Average Joe" (First Mondays, June 18, 2018)
- Opinion analysis: Court affirms without opinion in tribal-fishing-rights case (Miriam Seifter, June 12, 2018)
- A "view" from the courtroom: Chipping away at the caseload (Mark Walsh, June 11, 2018)
- Argument analysis: Court debates standard for violating tribal fishing rights (Miriam Seifter, April 19, 2018)
- Argument preview: Justices to consider the scope of tribal fishing rights (Miriam Seifter, April 11, 2018)
- Court bulks up this term's docket (UPDATED) (Amy Howe, January 12, 2018)