Decided
South Carolina v. North Carolina
Holding
The Catawba Project and Duke Energy (but not the City of Charlotte) can intervene in this original case in which South Carolina claims North Carolina diverted more than its fair share of water from the Catawba River.
Judgment
Exceptions to the Special Master's First Interim Report overruled in part and sustained in part, 5-4, in an opinion by Samuel Alito on Jan 20, 2010. Chief Justice Roberts filed a separate opinion concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part, joined by Justices Thomas, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor.
Merits Briefs
- Brief for Exceptions of The State of South Carolina to First Interim Report of The Special Master and Brief In Support of Exceptions
- Brief for the State of North Carolina in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Exceptions
- Sur-Reply Brief of The State of South Carolina In Support of Exceptions To First Interim Report of The Special Master
- Reply Brief of Intervenor Catawba River Water Supply Project To Exceptions of South Carolina to the First Interim Report of the Special Master
- Reply Brief of Intervenor Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC’s To Exceptions of South Carolina to the First Interim Report
- Reply Brief of Intervenor The City of Charlotte In Response To Exceptions of the State of South Carolina
Amicus Briefs
Recommended Citation: South Carolina v. North Carolina, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/south-carolina-v-north-carolina/