New Hampshire v. Maine
Headline: Court approves final decree fixing the maritime boundary between New Hampshire and Maine near the Isles of Shoals, settling control of specific waters and barring future state disputes.
Holding: The Court approved the Special Master’s report, entered a consent judgment fixing the lateral marine boundary between New Hampshire and Maine near Portsmouth and Gosport Harbors, and enjoined both states from disputing the awarded areas.
- Fixes which state controls specific waters near the Isles of Shoals.
- Stops either state from contesting the awarded maritime areas permanently.
- Splits case costs evenly between New Hampshire and Maine.
Summary
Background
A dispute between the States of New Hampshire and Maine concerned where their maritime boundary runs from the inner Portsmouth Harbor to the breakwater at the end of the inner Gosport Harbor in the Isles of Shoals. Both states joined a motion for a final decree and submitted a Special Master’s report. The Court approved that report and the consent judgment. The decision cites an 1740 Order of the King in Council and uses modern Coast and Geodetic Survey charts and coordinates to fix key points.
Reasoning
The central question was how to draw the lateral marine boundary using historical grants, the 1740 Order, and navigational channels. The Court accepted the Special Master’s method: it defined “middle of the river” and “middle of the harbour” as the middle of the main navigation channels, located channel termination points by range lights and chart symbols, and computed an arc of a great circle connecting those points. The Court noted a “special circumstances” basis tied to the divided Isles of Shoals and entered the precise, charted boundary and coordinates as the decree.
Real world impact
The decree determines which state has sovereignty, jurisdiction, and dominion over the adjudged marine areas and enjoins officials, agents, and citizens of each state from disputing those allocations. The Court ordered the states to split the costs equally and retained the case on the docket for further implementation orders. Mariners, resource managers, and state authorities will rely on the specified charted line and coordinates for enforcement and administration.
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?