Court case

Washington v. United States (culverts case)

An equally divided Supreme Court in 2018 left in place a ruling that Washington must fix state culverts that violate tribal treaty fishing rights.

Court
U.S. Supreme Court
Year
2018
Nations
Stevens treaty tribes of western Washington (21 tribes)
Treaty at issue
Stevens treaties of 1854-55
Effect on land rights
advanced

What happened

The Stevens treaties were entered in 1854 and 1855 between Indian tribes in the Pacific Northwest and the Governor of Washington Territory. The tribes relinquished large areas of land, watersheds and offshore waters in what is now Washington State. In exchange they were guaranteed a right to engage in off-reservation fishing.

In 1970 the United States sued the State of Washington on behalf of the tribes over a persistent conflict about fishing rights. In a 1974 decision the district court authorized the parties to use its continuing jurisdiction to resolve disputes that followed. In this stage, the tribes and the United States asked the court to order the State to correct culverts, which allow streams to flow underneath roads. The district court issued an injunction.

On June 27, 2016, the Ninth Circuit affirmed. It held that "in building and maintaining barrier culverts" Washington "violated, and was continuing to violate, its obligation to the Tribes under the Treaties." It held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the State to correct most of its high-priority barrier culverts within seventeen years, and to fix the rest at the end of their natural life or during road projects undertaken for other reasons.

Washington took the case to the Supreme Court. On June 11, 2018, the Court issued a one-sentence per curiam order: "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court." Justice Kennedy took no part in the decision. The order gave no reasons.

Summarized with AI assistance from 3 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Well supported by the sources below.

  1. The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.Washington v. United States, No. 17-269 (2018) (per curiam) (Legal Information Institute, Cornell)
  2. Washington violated, and was continuing to violate, its obligation to the Tribes under the TreatiesUnited States v. Washington, 827 F.3d 836 (9th Cir. 2016) (court opinion, 9th Cir., via CourtListener)
  3. enjoining Washington to correct most of its high-priority barrier culverts within seventeen yearsUnited States v. Washington, 827 F.3d 836 (9th Cir. 2016) (court opinion, 9th Cir., via CourtListener)

Research notes. The opened Ninth Circuit document is the opinion filed June 27, 2016; the atlas page says an amended opinion (March 2, 2017) superseded it, and that the order requires replacing culverts by 2030. Neither point was checked against an opened source, so the narrative describes only the 2016 opinion and the Supreme Court order. The reporter cites on the page were not confirmed.

Treaty or agreementTreaty under documented pressureShapes from the 1899 federal record: approximate, not legal boundaries.

Who is doing the work

This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:

Working with these nations

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Concerns the instrument 5

Doctrine applied 2

Policy era 1

Nations named 1

Sources

  1. supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/584/17-269/legal text copy
The record’s fields
Citation
584 U.S. ___ (2018) (per curiam, equally divided), No. 17-269, aff'g United States v. Washington, No. 13-35474 (9th Cir. Mar. 2, 2017) (amended opinion; superseded original at 827 F.3d 836 (9th Cir. 2016); reported at 853 F.3d 946)
Holding
An equally divided Court (Kennedy recused) affirmed the Ninth Circuit's holding that the treaties' fishing right includes a duty not to block salmon runs with state-owned culverts; the injunction requires replacing culverts by 2030.
Kind
Court case
Confidence
High

Correct this record