October Term 2000 · Docket 00-189
Did Congress defeat Idaho's title to submerged lands before statehood?
Idaho claims federal acts defeated its title to submerged lands. The United States asserts these lands remain essential to state sovereignty.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Givens argued six prestatehood acts defeated Idaho's title to submerged lands.
Mr. Strack argued submerged lands are an essential attribute of state sovereignty.
Mr. Strack noted the Corps of Engineers does not typically regulate state encroachments.
Justice O'Connor asked if the Corps could preempt state regulation of state interests.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 39-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Idaho argues six prestatehood acts defeated its title to submerged lands. The United States counters that submerged lands are essential to state sovereignty. The Court must decide which legal principle controls the dispute.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 23, 2001.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 39-41
What each side wants
Idaho wants the Court to find its title to submerged lands was defeated before statehood.
The United States wants the Court to affirm that submerged lands are essential to state sovereignty.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
What each side says
Idaho contends six prestatehood acts of Congress defeated its title to submerged lands.
The United States contends submerged lands are an essential attribute of state sovereignty.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked Mr. Givens to clarify his statement about prestatehood acts.
Justice O'Connor asked Mr. Strack about federal preemption when state interests are involved.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 39-41
Why it matters
The outcome determines who controls submerged lands in Idaho. This affects state management of waterways and federal regulatory authority. The decision clarifies the balance between state sovereignty and federal power over submerged lands.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 39-41 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 39-41
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 23, lines 45-13 — Transcript, file page 23, lines 45-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 32, lines 21-23 — Transcript, file page 32, lines 21-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 49, lines 25-39 — Transcript, file page 49, lines 25-39
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.