United States of America v. State of Alaska on Bill of Complaint (503 U.S. 569)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided April 21, 1992 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 503 U.S. 569 · 112 S. Ct. 1606
- Decided
- April 21, 1992
- Term
- October Term 1991
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice White
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice White delivered the opinion of the Court. Ever since the Nome gold rush of 1899 to 1901, the Seward Peninsula in western Alaska has been a focus of attempts to gain control over the region’s natural riches. See In re McKenzie, 180 U. S. 536 (1901). The city of Nome sprang to life almost overnight, with some 20,000 gold seekers arriving by vessel in the summer of 1900 when the spring thaw opened up seaward passage. Since that time, Nome has never been linked to interior Alaska by road — travelers and traders must arrive by air, sea, or dog sled. This heavy reliance on seaward traffic, and the lack of a natural port in the region, inspired Nome in the early 1980’s to develop plans to construct port facilities, including a causeway with road, a breakwater, and an offshore terminal area, extending into Norton Sound. The implications of this construction for the federal-state offshore boundary lie at the heart of this lawsuit, which comes to us on a bill of complaint filed by the United States. The question presented is whether the Secretary of the Army may decline to issue a permit to build an artificial addition to the coastline unless Alaska agrees that the construction will be deemed not to alter the location of the federal-state boundary. I On August 25, 1982, the city of Nome applied for a federal permit to build port facilities with the Alaska District Corps of…
Excerpt of a 44,613-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.