New Jersey v. New York Et Al.

Background

The dispute involves the State of New Jersey as complainant, the State of New York and the City of New York as defendants, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as an intervener. New Jersey sought an injunction to stop New York and the City of New York from diverting large amounts of water from the Delaware River and its tributaries to supply New York City. The matter was heard on exceptions to a Special Master’s report, and the Court issued a decree setting what diversions, if any, are allowed.

Reasoning

The Court addressed whether New York and the City of New York could divert water and under what limits and conditions. The Court denied New Jersey’s request to bar a diversion up to the equivalent of 440 million gallons daily but granted relief preventing diversions beyond that amount. The decree imposes conditions: a sewage-treatment plant at Port Jervis achieving specified reductions in organic impurities and bacteria, controls on untreated industrial waste, required releases from New York City reservoirs to maintain minimum river flows (with a 30% release cap tied to the diversion-area yield), and inspection and record-access rights for New Jersey and Pennsylvania. The Court also denied Pennsylvania’s request for a present allocation of 750 million gallons daily and for appointment of a river master, both without prejudice, and made the decree subject to federal navigation authority and the Court’s continuing jurisdiction.

Real world impact

Practically, New York City may continue limited diversions while downstream states gain enforceable pollution controls, minimum-flow releases, and inspection rights. Reservoir operations must supply extra water when river flow falls below set levels, and costs of the litigation are divided among the parties. The decree is not presented as a final, immutable outcome: the Court retained power to modify the order or issue supplemental relief in the future.