United States v. California

Background

The federal government, through the Attorney General, sued the State of California over who controls the seabed and oil resources in the Pacific Ocean just off California’s coast within a three-mile belt. California had issued leases under state statutes and lessees had been taking oil and paying rents to the State. California argued its original state boundary and earlier cases gave it ownership.

Reasoning

The Court framed the central question as whether the state or the nation has the paramount right to determine use of the marginal sea and its seabed. The majority examined historical practice, prior decisions, and national responsibilities for security and foreign relations. It concluded the original states did not clearly own a three-mile ocean belt in a way that would bar national control, and that national dominion and paramount rights over the three-mile marginal sea belong to the United States rather than California.

Real world impact

The decision declares federal paramount rights over the seabed and resources in the three-mile belt off California and allows the United States to enjoin state-authorized oil taking. The Court rejected defenses like laches or estoppel as insufficient to divest the Government of those national interests. The parties may submit a decree form to implement the ruling, and the Court noted it could later conduct more detailed boundary proceedings if needed.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices dissented. Justice Reed argued the original states had owned the three-mile belt and California should hold title. Justice Frankfurter argued the Court created a property-style national claim better left to the political branches and urged dismissal.