United States v. State of California
Cases that cite this one
58 later published cases cite this decision. The 24 that cite it most often are listed here.
- United States Department of Treasury v. National Treasury Employees Union Chapter 73 (District Court, E.D. Kentucky 2025)
- SAMUEL C. JOHNSON 1988 TRUST v. Bayfield County (District Court, W.D. Wisconsin 2009)
- Barber v. Hawai'i (9th Cir. 1994)
- Northampton County Area Community College v. Dow Chemical, U.S.A. (Pa. 1991)
- United States v. St. Regis Paper Company (2d Cir. 1966)
- Woodbury v. United States (District Court, D. Oregon 1964)
- Lovey v. Escambia County (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1962)
- United States v. Ahtanum Irrigation District (9th Cir. 1956)
- Smiths America Corp. v. Bendix Aviation Corp. (District Court, District of Columbia 1956)
- Ishikawa v. Acheson (United States District Court for the District of Hawaii 1950)
- United States v. California (Supreme Court of the United States 2014)
- United States v. California (Supreme Court of the United States 2014)
- United States v. State (Supreme Court of the United States 2014)
- Com. v. CITIZENS ALLIANCE (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009)
- Commonwealth v. Citizens Alliance for Better Neighborhoods, Inc. (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2009)
- Flannigan v. Arkansas (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas 2006)
- American Colloid v. Interior Secretary (10th Cir. 1998)
- Tidewater Marine Western, Inc. v. Bradshaw (Cal. 1996)
- NELSON BY NELSON v. Dibble (Pa. 1986)
- Dennis Creppel, Cross-Appellant v. Shell Oil Company, Cross-Appellee (5th Cir. 1984)
- United States v. Nez Perce County, Idaho (United States District Court for the District of Idaho 1982)
- United States v. California (Supreme Court of the United States 1981)
- United States v. City Of Philadelphia (3d Cir. 1981)
- Cobb Coin Co. v. Unidentified, Wrecked & Abandoned Sailing Vessel (United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida 1981)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
UNITED STATES
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
No. 12, Original.
Supreme Court of the United States
October 27, 1947
PER CURIAM.
Since our opinion which was announced in this case June 23, 1947, 332 U.S. 19, 67 S.Ct. 1658, two stipulations have been filed in this Court, signed by the Attorney General and Secretary of the Interior of the United States on the one hand and by the Attorney General of the State of California on the other hand. In these stipulations the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Interior purport to renounce and disclaim for the United States Government paramount government power over certain particularly described submerged lands in the California coastal area. In such stipulations the United States Attorney General and Secretary of the Interior furthermore purport to bind the United States to agreements which purport to authorize state lessees of California coastal submerged lands to continue to occupy and exploit those lands, and which agreements also purport to authorize California under conditions set out to execute leases for other submerged coastal lands.
Robert E. Lee Jordan has filed a petition in this Court praying that he be permitted to file a motion as amicus curiae or in the alternative as an intervenor to have the foregoing stipulations and agreements set aside and declared null and void on the ground among others that the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Interior are without authority to bind the United States by agreements which it is alleged would if valid alienate and surrender the Government's paramount power over the submerged lands concerning which the stipulations are made.
It is ordered that the petition of Robert E. Lee Jordan to file the motion here to declare the stipulations null and void be denied, without prejudice to the assertion of any right he may have in a proper district court.
It is further ordered that the stipulations between the United States Attorney General and the Secretary of the Interior on the one hand and the Attorney General of California on the other, which stipulations purport to bind the United States, be stricken as irrelevant to any issues now before us.
And for the purpose of carrying into effect the conclusions of this Court as stated in its opinion announced June 23, 1947, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows:
1. The United States of America is now, and has been at all times pertinent hereto, possessed of paramount rights in, and full dominion and power over, the lands, minerals and other things underlying the Pacific Ocean lying seaward of the ordinary low-water mark on the coast of California, and outside of the inland waters, extending seaward three nautical miles and bounded on the north and south, respectively, by the northern and southern boundaries of the State of California. The State of California has no title thereto or property interest therein.
2. The United States is entitled to the injunctive relief prayed for in the complaint.
3. Jurisdiction is reserved by this Court to enter such further orders and to issue such writs as may from time to time be deemed advisable or necessary to give full force and effect to this decree.
Inasmuch as the stipulations of July 26, 1947, have been stricken, Mr. Justice FRANKFURTER desires explicitly to note his understanding that insofar as the meaning or scope or validity of the stipulations may give rise to any legal issue, no such issue has been before the Court or has here been considered.
Mr. Justice JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.