October Term 2003 · Docket 129 ORIG.
Who regulates structures on the Potomac River?
Virginia and Maryland dispute who controls riverfront construction.
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
Virginia argues the compact language is plain and unambiguous.
Maryland cites the 1877 Black-Jenkins Award for its authority.
Virginia claims Maryland never disputed its regulatory role for 180 years.
Maryland asserts it can regulate Virginia citizens placing structures.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- 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 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-33
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
Virginia and Maryland fight over river regulation authority.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 7, 2003.
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 60, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-33
What each side wants
Virginia wants to build structures without Maryland rules.
Maryland wants to regulate Virginia riverfront construction.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
What each side says
Virginia argues compact language grants it exclusive control.
Maryland argues historical awards confirm its regulatory authority.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
What the justices asked
How do you identify the historic low-water mark?
Has Virginia ever claimed regulatory authority over piers?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-33
Why it matters
The outcome defines state power over shared waterways.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
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 60, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 31-33
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 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 37-3 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 37-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 15-45 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 15-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 41-57 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 41-57
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 47-29 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 47-29
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.