October Term 2012 · Docket 11-597

Does temporary government flooding count as a taking?

The dispute centers on whether temporary flooding by the government constitutes a taking under the Fifth Amendment.

Official caption: Arkansas Game and Fish Comm'n v. United States
Latest argument session: 2012-10-03
Latest official Court activity: 2012-10-03
Latest verified event: Argued
Sources analyzed through: Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

2026-08-29 — 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 · 2012-10-03

What happened at the argument
Mr. Goodhart argued temporary flooding can be a taking. He stated the Federal Circuit ruling that permanent consequences are irrelevant is incorrect. He asserted the lower-court rule cannot stand.
Mr. Kneedler argued temporary flooding is a trespass. He distinguished temporary flooding from permanent invasion cases. He cited precedent requiring permanent invasion for government responsibility.
questions_and_answers

Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 9-11 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 9-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 51-17 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 51-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-5 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 51-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 51-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-25 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 37-25 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 37-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 23-39 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 23-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 17-27 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 17-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 37-39 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 37-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 49-3 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 49-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-27

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case asks if temporary flooding by the government counts as a taking under the Fifth Amendment. the side that brought the case argues temporary flooding can be a taking. The government argues temporary flooding is never a taking. The lower court ruled temporary flooding is not a taking. the side that brought the case seeks to reverse that ruling. The government seeks to affirm that ruling.