Agreement Between Two Or More States Is A

Treaties between states that were ratified under the Articles of Confederation after American independence from 1776 until the ratification of the current U.S. Constitution in 1789 are treated as intergovernmental treaties. These include agreements such as the Treaty of Beaufort, which established the border between Georgia and South Carolina in 1787 and is still in force. An Interstate Compact is an agreement between or between two or more states in the United States. To enter into force, it must be approved by the legislators of those states and approved by Congress, depending on the purpose of the pact. Other types of intergovernmental litigation, which the Court has undertaken, include appeals brought by one State as a representative of the obligations of another State for the collection of proceedings,14FootnoteSouth Dakota v. North Carolina, 192 U.P. 286 (1904). of Virginia v. West Virginia to determine the share of the public debt of the original State of Virginia that the latter owed to the former,15FootnoteVirginia v. West Virginia, 220 U.S. 1 (1911). of Arkansas to dissuade Texas from disrupting the performance of a contract by a Texas foundation to help build a new hospital at the University of Arkansas Medical Center,16FootnoteArkansas v.

Texas, 346 U.P. 368 (1953). 17FootnoteKentucky v. Indiana, 281 U.P. 163 (1930). A lawsuit for interstate equity to determine a deceased`s place of residence for inheritance tax purposes,18footnotetexas v. Florida, 306 U.P. 398 (1939).

In California, Texas, 437 U.S. In 601 (1978), the court denied a state the opportunity to file an initial appeal against another state to determine the controversial residence of a deceased for death tax purposes, with several judges finding that Texas v. Florida had been either ill-decided or doubtful. But after it was found that an inter-coupling appeal by the estate administrator to the establishment of residence was excluded by the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution, Cory v. White, 457 U.S. 85 (1982), the court allowed the initial appeal for dissent to be filed. Texas, 457 U.S. 164 (1982). and a complaint by two states to prevent a third from imposing a natural gas measure that would have the effect of limiting the intergovernmental flow of natural gas from the state in the event of a shortage.19Notation des piedsPennsylvania v.

West Virginia, 262 U.P. 553 (1923). The Court of Justice, Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U.S. 725 (1981), relied on this case to challenge a natural gas tax whose impact was attributable to consumers in the complaining state. And in Wyoming v. Oklahoma, 502 United States 437 (1992), the court allowed a state to sue another state to challenge a law that requires all public companies to burn a mixture containing at least 10% of the public coal, the plaintiff state having previously delivered 100% of the coal to these refueling companies and thus suffered a loss of tax revenue on coal. More recently, in Florida v. Georgia, the Supreme Court summarized the various related but more specific principles that govern the doctrine of equitable distribution in intergovernmental disputes between two states.20Footnote585 U.S. .

.

filed under: Uncategorized