Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States
424 U.S. 800 · 1976 · Supreme Court of the United States
Holding
The McCarran Amendment did not divest federal district courts of jurisdiction over federal water-rights suits, and its consent to state-court adjudication extends to reserved rights held on behalf of Indian tribes; nevertheless, factors favoring unified state adjudication of water rights supported dismissing the federal suit in favor of Colorado's comprehensive state proceeding.
"the desirability of unified adjudication of water rights" — Syllabus, Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States, 424 U.S. 800 (1976)
Why it matters for settlements
The 'Colorado River abstention' doctrine channels most tribal reserved-rights quantification into state general-stream adjudications rather than federal court.
Sources
- CourtListener search API (citation, date, court, canonical URL) (courtlistener.com, retrieved 2026-09-01)
- Justia (syllabus and opinion text; cross-check) (supreme.justia.com, retrieved 2026-09-01)
Related: doctrine overview · all cases · settlements table