Supreme Court appoints new judge to oversee water dispute

The U.S. Supreme Court has appointed a new judge to oversee the Rio Grande water dispute between Texas and New Mexico.

The case will continue after the high court’s June ruling dismissed a deal between New Mexico, Colorado and Texas, as five justices sided with objections from the federal government to the deal.

Justices appointed Judge D. Brooks Smith, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from Duncansville, Pa., to replace federal appeals Judge Michael Melloy as the special master in the case in July.

A special master acts as a trial judge, decides on issues in the case and prepares reports to inform the U.S. Supreme Court’s ultimate opinions in the case.

Smith, 72, has a long career in law, first starting in private practice and as a prosecutor. He donned the robes in 1984 as both a Court of Common Pleas judge in Blair County, Pa., and an administrative law judge.

In 1988, he was appointed by President Ronald Reagan and confirmed to a federal position for the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

In 2002, the Senate confirmed his appointment by the Bush administration to the federal appeals court, where he’s served since.

This is the third special master for the case, called Original No. 141 Texas v. New Mexico and Colorado. 

In a complaint filed in 2013, Texas alleged that pumping in New Mexico below Elephant Butte Reservoir was taking Rio Grande water owed to Texas under a compact from 1939.

That 85-year-old document governs the Rio Grande’s use between Colorado, New Mexico and Texas, and also includes provisions for sending water to Mexico under 1906 treaty obligations and acknowledges regional irrigation districts.

In 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled to allow the federal government to join the case, accepting the arguments that New Mexico’s groundwater pumping threatened federal obligations to deliver water to Mexico and two irrigation districts.

After months of negotiations and a partial trial, Colorado, Texas and New Mexico proposed a deal to end the yearslong litigation. The federal government and regional irrigation districts objected to the deal, saying that it imposed unfair obligations and was negotiated without their agreement.

Melloy recommended the court ignore the federal government’s objections and approve the state’s proposed deal.

In June, the high court released a 5-4 ruling siding with the federal government’s objections and blocking the state’s deal.

It’s unclear what comes next in the case under the new special master, but the parties could return to the negotiation table to hammer out another deal or return to the courtroom.