10 Apr Supreme Court Averts War Between Delaware and New Jersey
Okay maybe not war exactly. But last month the Supreme Court rendered an interesting opinion resolving a bitter border dispute between Delaware and New Jersey. Just how bitter? Well, according to the Court, the dispute became so heated that “Delaware considered authorizing the National Guard to protect its border from encroachment [and] one New Jersey legislator looked into recommissioning the museum-piece battleship U.S.S. New Jersey in the event that the vessel might be needed to repel an armed invasion by Delaware.” Armed invasion of the Jersey shore by the Delaware National Guard?
What could have led these two states to almost come to blows? Of course, oil. Well, okay not oil exactly, but natural gas. In essence, New Jersey wanted to construct a natural gas facility in New Jersey and build a pier that extended into Delaware waters for supertankers to dock. Delaware refused to authorize this, which led New Jersey to conclude that Delaware was acting beyond the scope of its regulatory authority.
Why would Delaware not have the authority to regulate the construction of a pier within its own territory? Ordinarily it would, of course, but a 1905 Compact between the states gave New Jersey the right to build such a pier without Delaware’s approval. Or so New Jersey argued.
New Jersey read the Compact to give New Jersey “exclusive regulatory authority over all projects appurtenant to its shores, including wharves extending past the low-water mark on New Jersey’s side into Delaware territory.” The Court disagreed. I won’t bore you with the details, but suffice it to say that the Court interpreted the 1905 Compact to conclude that both states had concurrent jurisdiction over the matter.
So Delaware won the day and the great New Jersey War was averted. Thank goodness, otherwise the next Supreme Court case between Delaware and New Jersey would be over the interpretation of Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, … engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.”
I was following along with the majority and it sounded fine, but then Scalia’s dissent won me over. Dissents in subaqueous land cases are not usually worthwhile, but this was compelling.
Alito sided with New Jersey, for years his home state, in dissent. Breyer recused himself, probably having to do with BP stock ownership. I agree that Alito was right to hear the case, and I even agree with the dissent, but state loyalty does make for some interesting dynamics–I wonder whether any of the Justices hail from Delaware.